SH. PARMOD KUMAR,AMBALA CITY vs. PR.CIT, PANCHKULA
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessees substantially have no grievance at present. If the Department proposes further action under Section 263, the assessees are at liberty to revive the appeals.
What were the facts?
The three appeals were filed against the orders of the CIT for the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee's counsel submitted that the AO made no additions while giving effect to the CIT's orders. However, the assessees apprehended a second exercise under Section 263 of the Act.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals should be dismissed as the assessees currently have no grievances, with liberty to revive if further action is taken by the Department under Section 263.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
The present three appeals are directed against the separate orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax [in short ‘the CIT’ ] dated 22.02.2023, passed for assessment year 2018-19, in the respective case of these assessees.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset submitted that while giving effect to these orders, ld. AO did not make any additions, hence at present assessees are not having any grievances, however, assessees have apprehension that the Department may undertake a second exercise under Section 263 of the Act because Internal Audit Team has raised objection on the consequential orders of the AO passed in pursuance of 263 orders.
Since at present, substantially assessee has no grievance, but in case Department propose to take action under Section 263 of the Act again and issues a Show Cause Notice upon the appellant, then assessees will be at liberty to get these appeals revived by moving an application under ,207 & 208/CHD/2023 A.Y.2018-19 3 Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. Subject to the above, all these three appeals are dismissed.
Order pronounced on 03.04.2025.
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 Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026