VUNNAM NARASIMHA RAO,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 433/VIZ/2012Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 August 2019AY 2007-20083 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 was appealable before the CIT(A) and not the ITAT. Therefore, the appeal filed before the ITAT was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order passed by the Assessing Officer. The Department pointed out that the appeal was not maintainable before the ITAT as the order was appealable before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correct forum for filing an appeal against an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri P.V. Subba Rao – FCA
For Respondent: Shri D.K. Sonawal – CIT DR
Hearing: 19/08/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 433/VIZ/2012 (Asst. Year : 2007-08) Vunnam Narasimha Rao, vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), C/o P.V. Subba Rao, CA, Vijayawada. D.No. 29-4-8, K.R. Reddy Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada. PAN No. AARPV 1129 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri P.V. Subba Rao – FCA. Department By : Shri D.K. Sonawal – CIT DR

Date of hearing : 19/08/2019. Date of pronouncement : 23/08/2019. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax, Vijayawada, dated 27/01/2012 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, ld.DR has pointed that as Form No.36 at column No. 2, the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable for the reason that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is subsequent to the order passed u/sec.

2 ITA No.433 /VIZ/2012 (Vunnam Narasimha Rao)

263 of the Act, therefore it is an appealable order and appeal has to be filed before the ld. CIT(A) and not before the ITAT. 3. On the other hand, ld.AR has submitted that the appeal has to be filed before the ld. CIT(A), however, mistakenly the appeal is filed before the ITAT and submitted that same may be sent to the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits of the case. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record and orders of the authorities below. 5. We find that the impugned order passed by the Assessing Officer u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 263, dated 27/09/2012 is an appealable order before the ld. CIT(A) and therefore appeal has to be filed before the ld. CIT(A) and not before the ITAT. In view of the above, impugned order challenged before the Tribunal is not maintainable, hence the same is dismissed with a liberty to file the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). If assessee files appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) considered the delay liberally and pass the orders on merits in accordance with law. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed Order Pronounced in open Court on this 23rd day of August, 2019. Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 23rd August, 2019.

3 ITA No.433 /VIZ/2012 (Vunnam Narasimha Rao)

vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee – Vunnam Narasimha Rao, C/o P.V. Subba Rao, CA, D.No. 29-4-8, K.R. Reddy Street, Governorpet, Vijayawada. 2. The Revenue – ACIT, Circle-2(1), Vijayawada. 3. The CIT, Vijayawada. 4. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 5. Guard file. By order

(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →