DCIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA vs. SRI SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1891/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 August 2022AY 2009-103 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that once the Section 263 order was quashed, the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction to pass assessment orders based on it ceased. Consequently, the assessment orders were not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against orders of the CIT(A) for AYs 2009-10 to 2011-12. The assessments were made pursuant to a Section 263 order. The assessee had previously challenged the Section 263 order, and the Tribunal had quashed it.

What were the issues?

Whether assessment orders passed pursuant to a Section 263 order are sustainable if the Section 263 order itself is subsequently quashed by the 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, ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Girish Agrawal

Per Bench:- The present three appeals are directed at the instance of Revenue against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 10, Kolkata dated 31.05.2019 passed for the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12.

2.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset submitted that assessment orders were passed in these assessment years under section , 1892 & 1893/KOL/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-2010, 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 Shri Satya Prakash Sharma 263/147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act. In other words, he submitted that assessments were framed in pursuance of 263 order passed on 31.03.2018 in all these appeals. The assessee has challenged the order passed by the ld. Commissioner under section 263 in to 2576/KOL/2018.

3.

The appeals of the assessee against the order dated 31.03.2018 passed by the ld. CIT in these assessment years were allowed by the Tribunal on 22nd November, 2019. The Tribunal has quashed the order of the ld. Commissioner passed under section 263.

4.

Thus according to the ld. Counsel for the assessee, no fresh assessment orders could be passed under the directions of ld. Commissioner’s order dated 31.03.2018 passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, was unable to controvert this contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee.

5.

We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has placed on record the copy of the Tribunal’s order passed in to 2576/KOL/2018. On due consideration of the record, we find that jurisdiction in the ld. Assessing Officer was infused by the directions issued by the ld. Commissioner vide order dated 31.03.2018. The moment this order is quashed, therefore, all directions would extinguish and the ld. Assessing Officer will not have any jurisdiction to pass the orders in pursuance of the direction under section 263. In other words, the moment order passed under section 263 dated 31.03.2018 is vacated the ld. Assessing Officer consequently would be denuded from his powers to give effect to this order and, therefore, the assessment orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law. If assessment orders are not sustainable, there cannot be any subsequent proceeding at appellate stage. For this , 1892 & 1893/KOL/2019 Assessment Years: 2009-2010, 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 Shri Satya Prakash Sharma sole reason, we do not find any merit in these appeals of the Revenue. These are dismissed.

6.

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on August 24, 2022.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →