ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. BHIVA SHANKAR RANE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 519/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 January 2019AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT had previously quashed the CIT's order under Section 263. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the consequential assessment order and the additions made therein could not sustain.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made additions to the assessee's income based on an order passed by the CIT under Section 263. The assessee appealed this 263 order before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether consequential assessment order and additions can sustain when the underlying Section 263 order is quashed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL, VP & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

For Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg, Shri M.K. Kulkarni
Hearing: 24.01.2019Pronounced: 25.01.2019

आदेश / ORDER

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM :

These two appeals preferred by the Revenue emanates from the separate orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-6, Pune dated 10.11.2016 for the assessment years 2008-09 & 2009-10 as per grounds of appeal on record.

These appeals were heard together and since facts similar, issues common, these appeals are disposed of vide this consolidated order. We would take up the ITA No.518/PUN/2017 as lead case.

2 ITA Nos. 518 & 519/PUN/2017 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2009-10

2.

The brief facts in this case are that the assessee filed return of income

on 30.09.2008 disclosing taxable income at Rs.60,54,000/-. The assessment

was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Act’) determining the total income at Rs.1,20,02,498/-. The

assessment order of the Assessing Officer is treated as erroneous and

prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and therefore, order u/s.263 was

passed by the Ld. CIT-V directing the Assessing Officer to redo the order.

Thereafter, the assessee preferred appeal before the Income Tax Appellate

Tribunal against the order passed by the Ld. CIT-V u/s.263 of the Act.

2.1 The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune in ITA Nos. 813/PN/2014 for

the assessment year 2008-09 dated 12.08.2016 has allowed the appeal of the

assessee wherein the 263 order passed by the Ld. CIT-V was set aside and

quashed. The relevant portion of the Tribunal’s order is reproduced below:

“In the light of aforesaid discussion, we find that the action of the Commissioner us without authority of law and therefore cannot be sustained. In consequence, the order passed u/s.263 for the assessment year 2008-09 dated 28/03/2014 requires to be set aside and quashed. In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.813/PN/2014 relating to A.Y.2008-09 is allowed.”

3.

The Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently argued that since the order

u/s.263 of the Act based on which the consequential assessment order was

passed, was itself quashed, therefore, the consequential assessment order

was also liable to be quashed and the additions were deleted as per the order

of the Ld. CIT(Appeals).

4.

The Ld. DR fairly conceded to these facts.

5.

We have perused the case records and analyzed the facts and

circumstances in this case. We find that the additions made in the

3 ITA Nos. 518 & 519/PUN/2017 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2009-10

assessment order was in consequence to the 263 order passed by the Ld.

CIT(Appeals)-V, Pune. That on appeal before the Income Tax Appellate

Tribunal, Pune, the 263 order of the Ld. CIT-V, Pune was quashed. In such

scenario, the consequential assessment order also cannot sustain. Therefore,

the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has rightly deleted the additions. We do not find any

infirmity in the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and relief provided to the

assessee, is therefore, sustained. Hence, grounds raised by the Revenue are

dismissed.

6.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.518/PUN/2017 is

dismissed.

7.

In other appeal in ITA No. 519/PUN/2017 filed by the Revenue, the

facts and circumstances of the case are identical except the amounts. Since

all other facts, arguments of the parties are same and similar, the same

ruling as in ITA No.518/PUN/2017 shall apply. Therefore, for this case also,

we do not find any infirmity in the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and relief

provided to the assessee, is therefore, sustained. Hence, grounds raised by

the Revenue are dismissed.

8.

In combined result, appeals of the Revenue for assessment years 2008- 09 & 2009-10 are dismissed.

Order pronounced on 25th day of January, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- R.S. SYAL PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 25th January, 2019. SB

4 ITA Nos. 518 & 519/PUN/2017 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2009-10

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :

अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT (Appeals)-6, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT-5, Pune. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “बी” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6.

// True Copy // आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

�नजी स�चव / Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

5 ITA Nos. 518 & 519/PUN/2017 A.Ys.2008-09 & 2009-10

Date 1 Draft dictated on 24.01.2019 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 25.01.2019 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed JM/AM before the second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by AM/JM second Member 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →