Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap(KZ) & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]
ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This is an appeal preferred by the Revenue against the order of Ld. CIT-21, Kolkata dated 22.04.2019 for A.Y. 2015-16.
At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee pointed out that though it is the Revenue appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-21, Kolkata dated 22.04.2019 for A.Y. 2015-16, the assessee had preferred an appeal against the very same order of the Ld. CIT(A) being A.Y. 2015-16 which was listed for hearing on 08.07.2019 and the order was passed by the Tribunal on 06.09.2019. According to the counsel, the assessee had raised the following legal issue challenging the jurisdiction of the AO to frame the assessment order before the Tribunal which reads as under:
“2. For that the appellant was originally been assessed by Ld. DCIT, Central Circle-1, Ranchi since 2007. The return for the year under consideration was filed on 30.09.2015 against which notice u/s. 143(2) was issued by Ld. DCIT, Circle-21(1), New Delhi. As a matter of fact Ld. DCIT 21(1), New Delhi had no jurisdiction over the appellant company. Further order u/s. 127 was passed by Ld. CIT, Central Patna vide which the current AO got jurisdiction over the appellant company. Ld. AO proceeded on basis of 143(2) issued by Ld. DCIT, Circle-21(1) New Delhi. No notice under 143(2) was issued at Ranchi or current AO. As such, as a matter of fact no valid notice u/s. 143(2) was issued against the return filed, as such, assessment framed thereby is ab initio void and fit to be quashed.”
M/s. RungtaIrrigation Ltd. AY 2015-16
According to the learned counsel, the aforesaid legal issue was adjudicated by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee and the Tribunal was pleased to quash the assessment order itself wherein the Tribunal held as under:
36. For the reasons set out above therefore, we uphold the objections raised by the appellant against the validity of the impugned order u/s 143(3) for AY 2015-16. We accordingly hold that since in the present case no valid notice u/s 143(2) was issued by the AO who held jurisdiction over the case of the appellant, the consequent order passed u/s 143(3) dated 29.12.2017 was legally unsustainable and therefore is null in the eyes of law and therefore quashed. The assessee accordingly succeeds on the preliminary legal issue raised before us.
Therefore, according to the ld. counsel since the assessment order passed by the ACIT, Central Circle -3(1), Kolkata dated 29.12.2017 has been quashed by the Tribunal vide order dated 06.09.2019 and, therefore, this appeal of the Revenue which emanates from the very same assessment order dated 06.09.2019 has become infructuous since there is no assessment order surviving in the eyes of law and therefore he prays that the revenue appeal being infructuous be dismissed. Per contra, the learned DR who is present before us, Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, submitted that he is not empowered to argue this matter on behalf of the Revenue and, therefore, he submits that he could not be able to assist us in this matter.
Having heard the ld. counsel for the assessee and after going through the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) – 21, Kolkata dated 22.04.2019 for A.Y. 2015-16 and also the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal against the very same order of the Ld. CIT(A) in ITA 1224/Kol/2019 for A.Y. 2015-16, we note that the Tribunal was pleased to quash the order of the Assessing Officer in this case, ACIT, Central Circle – 3(1), Kolkata who framed the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 29.12.2017 for the reasons reproduced in para 3 (supra). Since we find that the Tribunal has already quashed the assessment order dated 29.12.2017, therefore, the order of the AO is null in the eyes of law and therefore, the Revenue’s appeal against the very same order of the Ld. CIT(A) which in turn emanates from AO’s order which has been quashed has become infructuous and therefore dismissed.
M/s. RungtaIrrigation Ltd. AY 2015-16 6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 25.10.2019