DCIT LTU 2, MUMBAI vs. TATA MOTORS LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1888/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2019AY 2007-083 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 found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order, which relied on a prior Tribunal decision that had already deleted the additions made under Section 263. Therefore, the grounds raised by the Revenue were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which had granted relief to the assessee based on a previous Tribunal decision. The original assessment order was set aside by the CIT under Section 263 as erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, but later additions were deleted by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in granting relief to the assessee based on a prior Tribunal decision, and if the original assessment order was indeed erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E”, BENCH

Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube, DR, Shri Nikhil Tiwari, AR
Hearing: 01/05/2019Pronounced: 03/05/2019

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in A.Y.2007-2008 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-I/DCIT(LTU)/52/2014-15 dated 28.12.2017 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 12.11.2014 by the ld. Income Tax Officer – LTU, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). 2. In the present appeal, the assessment was framed originally by the ld. AO u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C of the Act on 26.05.2011 determining total income of the assessee at Rs.12,87,74,27,653/-. This assessment was Tata Motors Ltd. subjected to revisional proceedings u/s.263 of the Act by the ld. Administrative CIT, wherein the ld.CIT vide order u/s.263 of the Act, dated 28.03.2014 set aside the order of ld. AO treating the same as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue in respect of certain issues. Against this order of ld.CIT passed u/s.263 of the Act, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal.

3.

Meanwhile, the AO passed order giving effect to the order of the ld. CIT passed u/s.263 of the Act making certain additions. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

The appeal preferred by the assessee before this Tribunal was decided in favour of the assessee in vide order dated 05.04.2017, wherein this Tribunal held that the assessee is entitled to relief based on decided judicial precedents available on the date of passing of assessment order by the ld.AO and, hence, there cannot be any error that could be attributed in the order of ld. AO by the ld.CIT(A) warranting the revisional jurisdictional u/s.263 of the Act. In other words, additions, that were subject matter of adjudication in the revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, got ultimately deleted on merits by the order of this Tribunal.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that ld. CIT(A) had placed reliance on the order of the Tribunal dated 05.04.2017 (supra) granting relief to the assessee. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the Tata Motors Ltd. order of the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, we dismiss the grounds raised

by the Revenue.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →