RAMPRASAD WAMANRAO BORDIKAR,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3), AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2467/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 October 2018AY 2009-103 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 a co-ordinate bench had previously held the CIT's order under Section 263 to be without jurisdiction. Consequently, the impugned order passed by the AO, which was based on the Section 263 order, did not survive.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which confirmed the AO's order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263. The assessee had previously appealed the CIT's order under Section 263 before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the consequential order passed by the AO survives when the order under Section 263, which formed its basis, was held to be without jurisdiction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM

For Appellant: Ms. Deepa Khare
Hearing: 23.10.2018Pronounced: 24.10.2018

आदेश / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM :

This appeal filed by the assessee is emanating out of the order 1. of Commissioner of Income Tax (A) – 2, Aurangabad dt.01.09.2017 for the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

On the date of hearing, Ld.A.R. submitted that the present appeal is against the order of Ld.CIT(A) wherein he has confirmed the order of AO passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act vide order dt.27.03.2015. She submitted that against the order of Ld.CIT passed u/s 263 of the Act, assessee had preferred appeal before the Tribunal. Hon’ble ITAT vide order dt.24.08.2017 (ITA No.648/PUN/2014) has held that the order passed by Ld.CIT u/s 263 of the Act to be without

ITA No.2467/PUN/2017

jurisdiction. She placed on record the copy of the aforesaid order. She

therefore submitted that since the order u/s 263 of the Act itself has

been held to be without jurisdiction, the impugned consequential

order passed by AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act does not survive

and therefore the assessee wants to withdraw the appeal. Ld.D.R. did

not controvert the submissions of Ld.A.R.

3.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on

record. I find that the present appeal has been preferred against the

order of Ld.CIT(A) wherein he has confirmed the action of AO in the

order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act. I further find that

against the order of Ld.CIT passed u/s 263 of the Act, assessee had

preferred appeal before Tribunal. I find that the Co-ordinate Bench of

the Tribunal in ITA No.648/PUN/2014 for A.Y. 2009-10 has allowed

the appeal of assessee by quashing the order of Ld.CIT passed u/s

263 of the Act. Since the basis of which the impugned order has

been passed has itself been held to be without jurisdiction, the

consequential order does not survive. Thus, in view of the request of

assessee to withdraw the appeal, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

as withdrawn.

4.

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

Order pronounced in open Court on 24th day of October, 2018.

Sd/-- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 24th October, 2018. Yamini

ITA No.2467/PUN/2017

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1.

अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad. 4. The Pr.CIT-2, Aurangabad. 5 �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक सद�य” / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Pune; 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER // True Copy //

// True Copy // व�र�ठ �नजी स�चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →