ANITA RANI,BULANDSHAHR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), BULANDSHAHR

The above captioned two separate appeals by two separate assessees are preferred against the order of the CIT(A), Ghaziabad dated 31.07.2018 pertaining to A.Y 2010-11.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that in both these cases, assessment has been framed pursuant to the order of the PCIT, Ghaziabad dated 22.03.2017 u/s 263 of the Act by which the assessments were set aside with directions to the Assessing Officer to pass fresh assessment order after making due enquiries. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the said order of the PCIT has been set aside by the Tribunal vide a consolidated order dated 17.05.2019 in and 2388/DEL/2017.

The ld. DR could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the revenue.

After hearing both the sides and considering the relevant material on record, we find that both the assessee assessment orders have been framed pursuant to the order of the PCIT, Ghaziabad dated 22.03.2017. That order of the PCIT has been quashed by the Tribunal [supra]. Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus, meaning thereby, that in case the foundation is removed, the super structure falls. Since the foundation has been removed, the super structure must fall.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in and 6498/DEL/2018 are allowed.