ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. A V VISHNU VARA PRASAD, VISAKHAPATNAM
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the orders passed under section 263 by the CIT were quashed by a coordinate bench of the ITAT and the jurisdictional High Court. Therefore, the revised assessments based on these orders were also invalid.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) initially accepted the assessee's returned income, including deductions under sections 54EC and 54F. However, the CIT later revised this order under section 263, directing the AO to disallow these deductions. The AO subsequently disallowed the deductions, increasing the total income.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment orders passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 were erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, and if the CIT's revisionary powers were correctly exercised.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश / O R D E R
PER Duvvuru R.L. Reddy, Judicial Member:
These appeals filed by the revenue are directed against orders of
the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1 {CIT(A)}, Visakhapatnam
vide ITA Nos.203&204/2015-16/AC,C-2(1),VSP/2017-18 dated
29.11.2017 for the assessment year 2010-11. Since, the facts are
identical and issues are common, they are clubbed, heard together and disposed-off by way of this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The only effective common ground raised by the revenue in these
appeals is that the CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessment
order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') is erroneous. Since the facts and
issues are common in both the appeals except difference in figures, we
take ITA No.14/Vizag/2018 for adjudication for the sake of convenience.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of
income on 30.7.2010 for the assessment year 2010-11 declaring total
income of ` 49,69,760/- by claiming deductions of ` 50,00,000/- u/s
54EC of the Act and ` 1,42,64,624/- u/s 54F of the Act. The case was
selected for scrutiny and the A.O. completed the assessment u/s 143(3)
of the Act accepting the returned income. Subsequently, the CIT-1,
ITA Nos.13&14/Vizag/2018 Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, VSKP Visakhapatnam passed order u/s 263 of the Act by setting aside the
order passed u/s 143(3) and directed the A.O. to disallow the claim of
exemption u/s 54EC and 54F of the Act after an opportunity of hearing
to the assessee. Consequent to the above, the A.O. issued show cause
notice asking the assessee to substantiate the claim for deduction u/s
54F and 54EC of the Act. Accordingly, the A.O. disallowed the deduction
claimed by the assessee from the long term capitals of ` 50,00,000/- u/s
54EC and ` 1,42,64,424/- u/s 54F of the Act respectively and the A.O.
thus completed the assessment by determining the total income at `
2,43,44,187/-
Not being agreed, the assessees preferred appeals before the
CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the order of the ITAT in ITA
Nos.177 & 178/Vizag/2015 dated 9.12.2016, allowed the appeals of the
assessees.
Aggrieved, the revenue filed these appeals before us. The Ld.
D.R. strongly relied on the grounds of appeal and the orders passed by
the A.O.
The Ld. A.R. submits that the orders passed u/s 263 of the Act
were quashed by the Hon’ble ITAT vide order (supra) and also quashed
by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, therefore, the orders
passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act has no legs to stand. 3
ITA Nos.13&14/Vizag/2018 Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, VSKP 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available
on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In
these cases, the orders passed u/s 143(3) of the Act were quashed by
the CIT by passing an order u/s 263 of the Act holding that the
assessments are erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the
revenue. Based on the directions of CIT, the A.O. has completed
assessments by giving effect to the orders passed u/s 263 of the Act.
On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) by considering the orders passed by the
coordinate bench of this Tribunal in ITA Nos.177 & 178/Vizag/2015
dated 9.12.2016 (against the order passed by CIT u/s 263 of the Act)
quashed the orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, since the
orders passed by the CIT u/s 263 of the Act were quashed by the ITAT
as well as the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court.
After considering the findings of the Ld. CIT(A), we do not find any
infirmity in the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A), hence, needs no
interference. Therefore, we restore the assessment orders passed by
the A.O. u/s 143(3) of the Act.
ITA Nos.13&14/Vizag/2018 Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, VSKP In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed. 9. The above order was pronounced in the open court on 22nd Mar’18.
Sd/- Sd/- (बी आर बासकारन) (धुवु आर. एल. रे!डी) (B.R. BASKARAN) (DUVVURU R.L. REDDY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER #या$यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER #वशाखापटणम /Visakhapatnam: 'दनांक /Dated : 22.03.2018 VG/SPS आदेश क� ��त)ल#प अ*े#षत/Copy of the order forwarded to:-
अपीलाथ� / The Appellant – The ACIT, Circle-2(1), Visakhapatnam 2. ��याथ� / The Respondent – Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, 10-50-19/1, Soudamini, Siripuram, Visakhapatnam 3. ��याथ� / The Respondent – Sri A.V. Vishnu Vara Prasad, 10-50-19/1, Soudamini, Siripuram, Visakhapatnam 3. आयकर आयु+त / The Principal CIT-1, Visakhapatnam 4. आयकर आयु+त (अपील) / The CIT (A)-1, Visakhapatnam 5. #वभागीय ��त�न.ध, आय कर अपील�य अ.धकरण, #वशाखापटणम / DR, ITAT, Visakhapatnam 6. गाड� फ़ाईल / Guard file आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER // True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM
More judgments on Section 54EC
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
- Shailendra Kumar Sogani, Bhopal vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)…ITA 1076/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Kashmira Rajnikant Doshi, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer Ward 42(1)(3), MumbaiITA 728/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT 19 1 Mumbai, Mumbai vs Nisha Jhaveri, MumbaiITA 2389/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Rajendra Chandanmal Pagaria, L/H of Late… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(1)…ITA 1221/PUN/2026[2011-12]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026