THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MACHILIPATNAM vs. NAVEENA RICE INDUSTRIES, GUDURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 572/VIZ/2018Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 July 2019AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly followed a previous ITAT order that quashed the revision proceedings. Therefore, the consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer was rendered invalid.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed an order of the CIT(A) which had allowed the assessee's appeal. The basis for the CIT(A)'s order was a prior ITAT decision that had quashed the revision proceedings initiated by the Pr.CIT.

What were the issues?

Whether the consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer is valid when the revision proceedings initiated by the Pr.CIT have been quashed by a higher tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

For Appellant: Shri D.L. Narasimha Rao, Adv
For Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, Sr.DR
Hearing: 01/07/2019

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. 572/VIZ/2018 (Asst. Year : 2012-13) ITO, Ward-1, vs. M/s. Naveena Rice Machilipatnam. Industries, RS No.59/2A, Tarakaturu Village, Guduru Mandal, Krishna District. PAN No. AAJFN 6020 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri D.L. Narasimha Rao, Adv. Department By : Smt. Suman Malik, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 01/07/2019. Date of pronouncement : 04/07/2019. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada, dated 27/08/2018 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the very basis on which 263 has been initiated by the Pr.CIT, dated 30/03/2017 for the A.Y. 2012-13 has been quashed by the ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in ITA No. 311/VIZ/2017 by order dated 31/07/2018 and submitted that the consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer dated

2 ITA No.572 /VIZ/2018 (M/s. Naveena Rice Industries)

29/12/2017 has no legs to stand and submitted that the ld. CIT(A) by following the order of the ITAT, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 3. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative has relied on the grounds of appeal. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record and orders of the authorities below. 5. We find that the ld. CIT(A) by order dated 27/08/2018 gave a categorical finding that the order passed by the Pr.CIT has been cancelled by the ITAT, Visakhapatnam Bench in ITA No. 311/VIZ/2017, dated 31/07/2018 for the A.Y. 2012-13 and therefore consequential order passed by the Assessing Officer u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 dated 29/12/2017 does not exist. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 04th day of July, 2019.

Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 04th July, 2019.

3 ITA No.572 /VIZ/2018 (M/s. Naveena Rice Industries)

vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee – M/s. Naveena Rice Industries, RS No.59/2A, Tarakaturu Village, Guduru Mandal, Krishna District. 2. The Revenue – ITO, Ward-1, Machilipatnam. 3. The Pr.CIT, Vijayawada. 4. The CIT(A), Vijayawada. 5. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 6. 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 →