DCIT CIR 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. SOUTH SEAS DISTILLERIES & BREWERIES LTD, MUMBAI

The captioned appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [AY] 2008- 09 assails the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal)-10, [CIT(A)], Mumbai dated 13/01/2015 arising out of the order of Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] order dated 14/10/2013 passed u/s143(3) read with Section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961. The revenue is aggrieved by relief provided to the assessee u/s 40(a)(ia) by the Ld. CIT(A).

Facts as emanating from the records are that the assessee, being resident corporate assessee, was subjected to revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 vide Ld. CIT order dated 21/02/2013 for impugned AY and consequently assessed at Rs.4,03,90,235/- in an order u/s 143(3) read with section 263 as against Rs.3,53,43,226/- determined in an assessment u/s 143(3). The assessee suffered disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for Rs.67,29,345/-, which upon appeal, has been deleted by Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 13/01/2015 by noting that Section- 263 order passed by Ld. CIT has been quashed by the Tribunal vide its order dated 11/12/2014 and since Section 263 order has not survived, consequential assessment passed in pursuance to the same also do not survive and therefore, dismissed assessee’s appeal being infructuous.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for Assessee [AR] drew our attention to the fact that Section 263 order passed by the Ld. CIT has been quashed by the Tribunal vide order dated 11/12/2014 and Ld. CIT(A) righty noting the said order, dismissed the South Seas Distilleries & Breweries Limited Assessment Year 2008-09 assessee’s appeal, being infructuous. The Ld. DR fairly conceded the same.

We have perused the material on record and the cited Tribunal order. We find that Section 263 order has been quashed by the Tribunal and therefore, Ld. CIT(A) rightfully following the same dismissed the assessee’s appeal, being infructuous in nature by noting that as Section 263 order do not survive, the consequential assessment made thereupon do not survive. Therefore, we find the impugned appeal, being a frivolous appeal only and therefore dismiss the same.

In nutshell, the revenue’s appeal stands dismissed.