NEW TEA COMPANY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. PCIT - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that once the original assessment order was set aside by the CIT under Section 263, the appeal against that order and the subsequent order of the CIT(A) became null and void. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was quashed.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an order from the CIT(A). However, during the pendency of this appeal, the CIT invoked revisional powers under Section 263 and set aside the original assessment order, directing a de novo assessment. This rendered the original appeal and the subsequent CIT(A) order legally invalid.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal against an assessment order is maintainable after the said order has been set aside by the CIT under his revisional jurisdiction.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM]
ORDER
Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM
This appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata dated 13.07.2017 for AY 2012-13.
At the outset itself, it has been brought to our notice by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the original assessment in this case was completed by the AO on 31.03.2015 against which the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has passed this impugned order on 13.07.2017 which is under challenge before us. However, it was brought to our notice that when the appeal was pending before the Ld. CIT(A) against the original assessment order dated 31.03.2015, the Ld. CIT invoked his revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and set aside the order of the AO and directed him to de novo assess vide order dated 30.03.2017. Therefore, according to Ld. Counsel for the assessee, once the order of the AO in the original assessment dated 31.03.2015 have been cancelled and de novo assessment has been directed to be framed, the appeal preferred by the assessee against the original order of assessment dated 31.03.2015 is null in the eyes of law, and, therefore, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dated 13.07.2017 is also null in the eyes of law. The aforesaid facts stated by the New Tea Company Ltd., AY 2012-13 Ld. AR could not be controverted by the Ld. CIT, DR. Therefore, we agree with the contention raised by the Ld. AR that the original assessment passed by the AO on 31.03.2015 against which the assessee had preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the consequent order passed by the dated 13.07.2017 is null in the eyes of law. The reason for coming to such a conclusion is that we note that the original assessment dated 31.03.2015 framed by AO has been cancelled by Ld. CIT and de novo assessment has been ordered by the Ld. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act and subsequently the AO has given effect to the said order of the Ld. CIT by reiterating the very same addition/disallowance once again by an assessment order dated 15.06.2017. In such a scenario, the legal effect is that the original assessment order dated 31.03.2015 of the AO is non-existing in the eyes of law after the order of Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act and, therefore, the appeal of the assessee against the original assessment dated 31.03.2015 becomes non est in the eyes of law. Since there is no assessment order existing which is to be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) in the first appellate jurisdiction and, therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 13.07.2017 on a non-existing assessment order of AO is also null in the eyes of law and, therefore, we quash the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 13.07.2015. The appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 8thMarch, 2019. Sd/- sd/- (Dr. A. L. Saini) (A. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Dated: 8th March, 2019 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1 Appellant – New Tea Company Ltd., Hindusthan Building, 2nd floor, 4, C. R. Avenue, Kolkata-700 001. 2 Respondent – Pr. C.I.T -2, Kolkata. 3 CIT(A)-2, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- 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
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026