DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SURAT vs. SACHIN NOTIFIED AREA, SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 140/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 August 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel argued that the order under Section 263, which led to the assessment order under Section 143(3), had been quashed by the ITAT. Therefore, the subsequent assessment order does not sustain.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the revenue against the order of the CIT(A) who allowed the assessee's appeal. The CIT(A)'s order was passed on 10-12-2024 for the assessment year 2017-18.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) is valid when the revisional order under Section 263, which formed its basis, has been quashed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 10(20)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri PM Jagasheth, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Ravinder Sindhu, CIT-D.R

आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:

1.

This is an appeal filed against the order dated 10-12- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18.

2.

The grounds of appeal are as under:- “(i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law. the ld. CIT(A) is justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee whereas the department has filed appeal before the Hon'ble High Court against the order of Hon'ble ITAT in ITA No 343/SRT/2022

dated 30.03.2023 in quashing the order of the Pr. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs 4,21,54,142/- even though the assessee is not qualifying for deduction u/s 10(20) of the Act and it has not routed the said amount of interest income on FDs thorough P&L Account. (iii) On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. (iv) It is therefore prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be set aside that of the Assessing Officer be restored. (v) The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground of appeal either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal.”

3. At the time of hearing, ld. A.R. submitted that the order u/s. 263 upon which the consequent order/assessment order u/s. 143(3) was passed has been quashed by the Tribunal vide order dated 26-06-2023 (ITA No. 343/Srt/2022). Thus, consequent order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act does not sustain.

4.

The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee as the assessment order dated 21-03-2023 stands void ab initio in the light of quashing of order u/s. 263 of the Act by the Tribunal in ITA 343/Srt/2022 dated 26-06-2023. Hence, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 08-08-2025.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →