CACTUS DEALCOM (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 249/KOL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 September 2022AY 2008-093 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since no revision order under Section 263 was found in the departmental records, it was to be assumed that no such order was ever passed. Consequently, the assessment order passed relying on a non-existent revision order was treated as void.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a revision order passed by the CIT under Section 263. The assessee claimed the order was never served and not found in departmental records. The department also could not produce any record of such an order.

What were the issues?

Whether a valid revision order under Section 263 was passed and served upon the assessee, and the validity of an assessment order based on a non-existent revision order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Borad

order : September 22, 2022 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the alleged revision order Commissioner of Income Tax [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT’] u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite notice, therefore, we proceed to decide the present appeal ex parte of the assessee after going through the records and after hearing the ld. DR.

3.

The assessee, inter alia, has taken the ground that no such order passed u/s 263 of the Act was ever served upon the assessee and further that, any such order passed u/s 263 is not available in the records of the Department as per information derived by the assessee by moving an application under Right to Information Act. However, the assessee has placed on record the copy of the assessment order dated 28.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act.

1.

Assessment year: 2008-09 Cactus Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. 4. In view of above pleadings taken by the assessee in the grounds of appeal

, the ld. DR was asked to produce on record the alleged revision order passed by the ld. CIT(A) u/s 263 of the Act. However today, the ld. DR has placed on file, the letter of ITO, Ward- 1(1), Kolkata dated 05.09.2022, the contents of which are reproduced as under:

3. The undersigned has personally requested the person dealing with 263 matter and she search the names of the case all the register kept with PCIT-1, Kolkata office from 2015-16 to 2020-21. But the details of the order u/s 263 was not found. The dealing person stated that the date of order is required for confirm the case, whether it was passed or not.” A perusal of the above letter reveals that there is no revision order passed u/s 263 of the Act in the records of the Department. Even there is no entry/reference passed in any of the record register kept with the PCIT-1, Kolkata’s office from 2015-16 to 2020-21. Even the ld. DR has stated at Bar that he has also himself checked the assessment records, and there is no mention in the record/register of any such order passed u/s 263 of the Act. Even in the copy of the assessment order dated 28.03.2014 passed u/s 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act, there is no mention of any date or number of any such revision order passed u/s 263 of the Act. Under the circumstances, since there is neither any copy of any order passed u/s 263 by the CIT available in the records of the Department, nor even there is any reference or entry in any of the record/register kept with the Department either in the office of the PCIT, Kolkata or in the office of the concerned Assessing Officer, therefore, we are left with no alternative than to assume that no such revision order u/s 263 of the Act has ever been passed. Consequently, the assessment order dated 28.03.2014 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) read with section 263 is treated as non-est being without any jurisdiction and without any directions by the CIT(A). In view of this, since as per the records of the Department, there is no such impugned order passed u/s 263 of the Act in existence in the records of the Department, therefore no such appeal lies against the said non-existent order. The appeal of the assessee is, therefore, dismissed being not maintainable, however, with the observations that the consequent assessment order passed u/s 143(3) read with section 263 dated 28.03.2014

Assessment year: 2008-09 Cactus Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. being void and non-est and will not have any force of law. With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Kolkata, the 22nd September, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- [डॉ�टर मनीष बोरड /Dr. Manish Borad] [संजय गग� /Sanjay Garg] लेखा सद�य /Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य /Judicial Member Dated: 22.09.2022. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Cactus Dealcom Pvt. Ltd 2. ITO, Ward-1(1), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →