SUKHBIR SINGH DHUPIA,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL C.I.T. - 13, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 992/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 January 2020AY 2013-142 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 held that the PCIT's revision proceedings under Section 263 were unsustainable as the original assessment order itself had been quashed. Therefore, the appeal against the revision order was allowed.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) initiated revision proceedings under Section 263 against the assessee's assessment order. However, the assessee's appeal against the original assessment order was allowed by the CIT(A) due to a lack of a valid Section 143(2) notice.

What were the issues?

Whether revision proceedings under Section 263 are valid when the underlying assessment order has been quashed for procedural defects.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA

Before: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

Shri Vigyaneshwar Nath Dutta, Advocate अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/By Appellant Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT-DR ��यथ� क� ओर से/By Respondent 01-01-2020 सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 17-01-2020 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14 arises against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-13, Kolkata’s order dated 26.03.2018 passed in case No.Pr.cit-13/Kol/Order u/s263/2017-18/7140-42, involving proceedings 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file(s) perused.

2.

It emerges the outset that the PCIT has passed his sec. 263 revision order under challenge on 26.03.2018 reversing the regular assessment in question dated 17.03.2016 thereby holding it as an erroneous are causing prejudice to interest of the Revenue. Case file indicates that the assessee had preferred its appeal against the said

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →