SHRI BIPINBHAI NARARNBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(1), AHMEDABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the foundation for the assessment order (the section 263 order) was extinguished, the assessment order itself was invalid. Therefore, the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order upholding it were vacated.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment order was passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263. The assessee had previously challenged the section 263 order before the Tribunal. The Tribunal had quashed the section 263 order.
What were the issues?
Whether an assessment order passed in pursuance of a quashed revisionary order is valid.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD - BENCH ‘C’
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH
आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of ld.CIT(A)-10, Ahmedabad dated 16.8.2016 passed for the assessment year 2009-10.
The ld.counsel for the assessee at the very outset submitted that impugned assessment order was passed on 28.1.2015 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In other words, this order was passed in pursuance of order of ld.Commissioner dated 25.3.2014 passed under section 263 of the Act. Appeal against this
ITA No.2834/Ahd/2016
order has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 16.8.2016. He submitted that order of the ld.Commissioner passed under section 263 was challenged by the assessee before the Tribunal in ITA No.935/Ahd/2014. The Tribunal has quashed 263-order. Therefore, there is no foundation to pass the assessment order impugned in the present appeal. The ld.DR was unable to controvert this contention of the ld.counsel for the assessee. The order of the Tribunal in ITA No.935/Ahd/2014 dated 261.6.2017 has been placed on record.
On due consideration of the above facts, we are of the view that since very foundation for passing this assessment order has been extinguished by quashing of 263-order at the end of the tribunal. There could not be any proceedings in pursuance of that order. Therefore, we have to vacate the assessment order impugned hereinunder. We allow the appeal of the assessee and set aside order of the ld.CIT(A) as well as of the AO.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the Court on 11TH September, 2018 at Ahmedabad.
Sd/- Sd/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad; Dated 11/09/2018
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026