PRAMOD LAKRA, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. IMC LIMITED , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 375/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 June 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal first condoned the 112-day delay in the Revenue's appeal, finding the reasons plausible. It then noted that its own co-ordinate bench had previously quashed the PCIT's Section 263 order in the assessee's case. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, affirming that the assessment, being a direct consequence of the quashed Section 263 order, was invalid and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's original assessment under Section 143(3) was revised by the PCIT under Section 263. This Section 263 order was subsequently quashed by a co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal. The Revenue then appealed to the present Tribunal against the CIT(A)'s order, which had upheld the quashing of the assessment that was a consequence of the already quashed Section 263 order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was correct in quashing an assessment order that was a consequence of a Section 263 revision order, which itself had been quashed by the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Gupta, AR
For Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, DR
Hearing: 17.06.2025Pronounced: 18.06.2025

O R D E R

PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kolkata-22 (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] in appeal no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1068013344(1) dated 27.08.2024 for the AY 2014-15.

2.

Shri K. M. Gupta appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Kapil Mandal, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld. CIT DR that the ld. CIT (A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the order u/s 263 of the Act passed by the ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4 (PCIT), has been quashed by the Tribunal. It was further submitted that as the paper book of the assessee has been filed on 11th June, 2025, he needed more time to go through the facts.

4.

In reply, the ld. AR submitted that the original assessment in the case of the assessee came to be completed u/s 143(3) on 22.12.2016. The

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal on the facts of the present case clearly shows that the appeal filed by the Revenue is delayed by 112 days. The Revenue has filed the condonation of delay petition. The Revenue has given a reasonable cause for the delay in filing of the appeal. The reasons are found to be plausible and the same are accepted and the appeal disposed off on merits. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT (A) in the impugned appeal clearly shows that in the penalty made paragraph of the order of the ld. CIT (A). The ld. CIT (A) has recognized that the ITAT has quashed the order u/s 263 of the Act passed on 11.02.2019 by the PCIT-4, Kolkata. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal in dated 25th August 2023, categorically shows that the Tribunal has quashed the revision order passed by the ld. PCIT-4, Kolkata u/s 263 of the Act. As it is noticed

6.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.06.2025.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →