ITO, WD-23(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY vs. ARABINDA ROY, HOOGHLY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1377/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2008-092 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 held that since the revisional order under Section 263 was quashed, the subsequent reassessment order passed by the AO was null and void. Therefore, the appeal filed by the revenue was non-existent in the eyes of law.

What were the facts?

The revenue's appeal was against an order passed by the CIT(A) which gave effect to a revisional order under Section 263. The assessee had challenged the Section 263 order before the Tribunal. The Tribunal had previously quashed the Section 263 order.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal arising from a reassessment order, which was based on a quashed revisional order, is maintainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: KOLKATA

Hearing: 08.05.2018Pronounced: 11.05.2018

Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM

1.

1. The appeal filed by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata dated 15.09.2015 for AY 2008-09.

2.

At the outset itself it has been brought to our notice that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT (A) is against the order of AO which was passed by him (AO) while giving effect to the revisional order passed under section 263 order by the Ld. CIT, Kolkata-XX dated 06.03.2013, wherein the Ld. CIT has set aside the original assessment order dated 23.12.2010 with the direction to frame de novo assessment. According to Ld. AR, the assessee had challenged the very assumption of jurisdiction by the Ld. CIT, Kolkata-XX u/s. 263 of the Act before the Tribunal vide (AY 2008-09) which has been decided by the Tribunal dated 24.08.2016, wherein the Tribunal was pleased to quash the 263 order of the Ld. CIT, Kolkata-XX. We have perused the order of the Tribunal which is placed from pages 5 to 12 of the paper book and we note that the order of Ld. CIT, Kolkata-XX dated 06.03.2013 for AY 2008-09 passed u/s. 263 was quashed by the Tribunal vide order dated 24.08.2016. Meanwhile, we note that the AO has given effect to the order of Ld. CIT, Kolkata-XX dated 06.03.2013 and had passed the reassessment order dated 27.03.2014.. Since the revisional order of the Ld. CIT, Kolkata-XX dated 06.03.2013 has already been quashed, the reassessment order of the AO dated 27.03.2014 pursuant to Ld. CIT’s order is null in the eyes of law and, therefore, the consequential proceeding including the appeal before us by the department is non est in the eyes of law and, therefore, the appeal does not survive and so stands dismissed.

3.

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 11.05.2018 Sd/- Sd/- (M. Balaganesh) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 11th May, 2018 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Appellant – ITO, Ward-23(1), Hooghly 2 Respondent – Shri Arabinda Roy, C/o S. N. Ghosh & Associates, Advocates, Seven Brothers’ Lodge, P.O. Buroshibtala, P.S. Chinsurah, dist. Hooghly, Pin 712 105. 3. The CIT(A) Kolkata.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →