BARODA RAJASTHAN KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 266/JPR/2021Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 July 2022AY 2015-163 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 held that the grounds raised by the assessee challenged the assessment order, not the section 263 order. Since a separate appeal against the assessment order was already pending, the present appeal was not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 263 of the IT Act. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) had already passed an assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 263, and the assessee had already filed a separate appeal against this assessment order.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the maintainability of the appeal as the grounds raised did not challenge the impugned order under section 263 but rather the subsequent assessment order, for which a separate appeal was already filed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 234B,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH-B, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 266/JP/2021

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM.

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the ld. PCIT, Ajmer under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961. However, while going through the case file, it was pointed out by the ld. D/R that the present appeal is not maintainable on the ground that the order giving effect of the impugned order passed under section 263 has already been passed by the AO while passing the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 263 read with section 144B of the IT Act on 19.09.2021 and the assessee has already preferred appeal against the said order of assessment which is still pending before the ld. CIT (A).

2.

The grounds of appeal taken before us challenging the order passed under section 263 are as under :-

1. The ld. AO has erred in facts and law on making addition on account of disallowance of written off of advances to the tune of Rs. 13,55,74,000/-.

2. The ld. AO has erred in facts and law on making addition on account of disallowance of various expenditure to the tune of Rs. 2,43,98,674/-.

3.

The ld. AO has erred in facts and law on making addition on account of sale/disposition of fixed assets to the tune of Rs. 64,72,780/-.

4. Consequential levy of interest u/s 234B is bad in law.

5.

Consequential initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)© of Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law.

6.

The appellant craves to add/alter grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.

3. After going through the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee, we noticed that though the assessee has challenged the impugned order under section 263 passed by the ld. PCIT, but the grounds raised by the assessee has challenged the order of the AO in making additions/disallowances under the different provisions of the IT Act which in our view is not maintainable. Since the assessee has not raised any ground qua challenging the order passed under section 263, rather on the contrary the assessee has challenged the order of assessment, which is not subject matter of appeal before us, as the separate appeal has already been filed by the assessee which is pending before ld. CIT (A) wherein the order of assessment passed by the AO has already been challenged by the assessee. Therefore, there is no cause of action for the assessee to maintain the present appeal. Thus the present appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed on this ground alone.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/07/22.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼lanhi xkslkbZ½ ¼ MkW- ehBk yky ehuk ½ (Dr. Mitha Lal Meena) (Sandeep Gosain) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 28/07/2022. das/ आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Ajmer. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent-The PCIT, Ajmer. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 266/JP/2021} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →