THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT, THRISSUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 297/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 August 2025Bench: S/SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV (Judicial Member)1 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the plea of non-existence of the order u/s 143(1) was raised for the first time before the Tribunal and was a mixed question of fact or law, hence not entertained. For other arguments, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Nationalized Scheduled Bank, filed its return of income for AY 2020-2021. The CPC made adjustments by disallowing provisions and amounts paid towards NPS. The assessee filed an application u/s 154 of the Act, which was decided, and thereafter appealed to the CIT(A) who affirmed the CPC's action.

What were the issues?

Whether the plea of non-existence of an order u/s. 143(1) can be raised for the first time before the Tribunal and whether the matter should be restored to the AO for fresh consideration of other arguments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: S/SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV

For Appellant: Shri Naresh , CA
For Respondent: Shri Sanjeet Kumar Dash, CIT DR
Hearing: 07.08.2025Pronounced: 20.08.2025

PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) NFAC, Delhi, dated 16.2.2024 having DIN No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061020724(1) and relates to assessment year 2020-2021.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Nationalized Scheduled Bank filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year on 15.2.2021. The return of income filed by the assessee was Page 2 of 5 processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. While processing the return of income, the CPC has made certain adjustments qua the sums set apart by the assessee as provision in its balance sheet. Similarly, the CPC has made another adjustment by disallowing the amount paid by the assesse towards NPS. Against the disallowances made by the CPC the assessee filed an application u/s 154 of the Act. The same was decided by the CPC and thereafter the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A).

2.1 The CIT(A) affirmed the action of the CPC.

3.

Aggrieved with the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, the assessee has come up in appeal before us and has raised four grounds of appeal which are dealt with by us hereunder.

4.

Appearing virtually, ld. counsel for the assessee argued that in this case there is no order u/s.143(1) of the Act at all passed by the Ld. AO (CPC) and, therefore, the action of the lower authorities is void abi nitio. On the last date of hearing, the Bench has directed the ld CIT DR to find out as to whether any order u/s.143(1) has been passed by the Ld. AO (CPC) or not. Ld CIT DR pointed out that the CPC has duly passed order on 6.8.2021, which order has duly been served upon the assessee and it is only after the receipt of the order, the assessee has filed anapplication u/s.154 of the Act and requested the Ld. AO to make the rectification. When the Bench has asked ld AR of the assessee as to .

Page 3 of 5 whether the facts and figures mentioned in the order u/s.143(1) are related to the assessee and how the assessee has filed application u/s.154 of the Act, if there is no order u/s.143(1) in the possession of the assessee, ld. counsel for the assessee failed to give us any reasonable reply.

5.

It is also observed that the plea i.e. non- existence of order u/s.143(1) have not been raised before the lower authorities i.e. before the ld CIT(A), NFAC and this plea taken by the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal, in our view, the plea of the assessee is a mixed question of fact or law and cannot be straight away taken for the first time before the ITAT. Therefore, we are not entertaining this plea of the assessee particularly in view of the fact that the facts and figures mentioned and disputed by the assessee u/s 154 before the AO(CPC) and the ld CIT(A) are coming out from the books of account of the assessee.

6.

So far as the other arguments of the assessee are concerned, we deem it fit to restore this matter to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for deciding afresh in accordance with law. The JAO shall consider all the arguments of the assessee and also various relevant documents of the assessee and then decide the issues in accordance with law.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in court on 20th day of August, 2025

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →