ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. ELITECORE TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 474/AHD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 February 2022AY 2009-102 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 noted that the Revenue's appeal was rendered infructuous due to a prior favorable order for the assessee on a similar issue. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against an order passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had previously challenged a similar order before a Coordinate Bench, which was allowed.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is infructuous given a prior decision by a Coordinate Bench on a similar matter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Singhal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jain, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24.02.2022

The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 28.12.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 03.05.2016 passed by the DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

The impugned order is the outcome of a proceeding initiated under Section 263 of the Act. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee that the said order passed under Section 263 of the Act by the Revenue was challenged before the Coordinate Bench and the same was ACIT vs. Elitecore Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Asst.Year –2009-10 - 2 - allowed by and under the order dated 04.09.2019; a copy whereof has also been submitted before us.

3.

In that view of the matter, the Ld. Counsel fairly submitted that this appeal is required to be dismissed as infructuous which has not been controverted by the Ld. DR.

4.

Having heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we dismiss the appeal as infructuous.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →