GAGAN INFRAENERGY LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PR. CIT DELHI- 4, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3435/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 September 2018AY 2010-114 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer, in giving effect to the Section 263 order, had already made the disallowance under Section 14A in both normal and 115JB computations. Therefore, the appeal was rendered infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal CIT under Section 263, which held the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. The Pr. CIT's order was primarily based on the non-addition of disallowance under Section 14A while computing book profit under Section 115JB.

What were the issues?

Whether the Principal CIT's order under Section 263 was justified, and if the subsequent actions taken by the Assessing Officer rendered the appeal infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 14A,Section 115JB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv
Hearing: 06.09.2018Pronounced: 19.09.2018

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by Principal CIT, Delhi-4 vide order dated 31/3/2015 for Assessment Year 2010-11.

2.

The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the order dated 31.03.2015 passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, (‘Pr. CIT’) under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) holding the assessment order dated 26.03.2013 to be erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue on certain issues, is beyond jurisdiction, bad in law and void ab initio.

1.1. That the Pr. CIT erred on facts and in law in exercising reversionary powers under section 263 of the Act in respect of certain issues, without appreciating that the twin conditions of that section viz., assessment order being erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, were not satisfied in the appellant’s case.

2. That the Pr. CIT erred on facts and in law in setting aside the assessment order on certain issues allegedly on the ground that the assessing officer did not add back disallowance u/s 14A while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act.

2.1 That the Pr. CIT erred on facts and in law in setting aside the assessment order, while arriving at the conclusion that although the appellant add back the amount disallowable u/s 14A while computing income normal under normal provisions of the Act, but, did not add back the same while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act.

2.2. That the Pr. CIT erred on facts and in law in setting aside the assessment order, while arriving at this conclusion that the Assessing Officer did not consider the uncontroverted fact of the non-inclusion disallowance u/s 14A in the computation of book profits.

2.3. That the Pr. CIT erred on facts and in law in setting aside the assessment order on the ground which has already attained its finality.”

3.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the order giving effect of Section 263 by the Assessing Officer was passed vide order dated NIL for Assessment Year 2010-11 and the Assessing Officer has granted the relief to the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that this appeal become infructuous and be dismissed.

4.

The Ld. DR did not object to the same.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the order dated NIL passed u/s 143 (3) read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 produced by the Ld. AR at the time of hearing wherein the Assessing Officer D. S. Rathi Deputy CIT, Circle (10(1) , New Delhi held as under:

Reply furnished by the AR is duly considered. After considering the reply and documentation filed by the assessee it is ascertained that as the matter has already been decide! Vide assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 26.03.2014 subsequently followed by rectification order u/s 154 and the disallowance of Rs. 76,62,074/ has been made in the normal as well as 115JB computation of the assessee for the relevant assessment year. In the light of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the Income of the assessee company is assessed at Rs. 76,62,074/ as originally assessed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 26/3/2014 by the A.O.

In light of this order as well as the submission of the Ld. AR, this appeal becomes infructuous and hence dismissed.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 19th September, 2018.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →