ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. RUDRANEE INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 399/PUN/2016Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 February 2018AY 2009-103 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 jurisdiction invoked by the CIT under section 263 was held to be bad in law in a previous order, subsequent proceedings arising from it are vitiated. Therefore, the present appeal filed by the Revenue is mis-conceived.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which granted relief to the assessee. The CIT(A)'s order was based on a previous Tribunal order in the assessee's own case. The Revenue stated they were filing an appeal against that previous Tribunal order.

What were the issues?

Whether proceedings arising from a revisional order held to be bad in law are sustainable. Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable when it is based on a prior Tribunal order against which the Revenue intends to file a further appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 43B,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Hearing: 06.02.2018Pronounced: 08.02.2018

आदेश / ORDER

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Aurangabad dated 29.12.2015 for the assessment year 2009-10.

2 ITA No.399/PUN/2016 A.Y.2009-10

2.

The Revenue in appeal has assailed the findings of Commissioner

of Income Tax (Appeals) only on the ground that the Department is in

process of filing appeal against the order of Tribunal based on which

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has granted relief to the

assessee.

3.

Shri Rajeev Kumar representing the Department submitted that

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has granted relief to the assessee

on the basis of order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.

799/PN/2014 for assessment year 2009-10 dated 23.12.2015 wherein

the Tribunal has held that invoking of revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in respect

of additions/disallowances u/s. 43B and 40(a)(ia) r.w.s.194C are bad in

law. The ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer in proceedings u/s.

143(3) r.w.s 263 had merely given effect to the order of Commissioner of

Income Tax passed u/s. 263 of the Act. The order giving effect to the

order u/s. 263 is prior to the order of Tribunal in ITA No.

799/PN/2014(supra).

4.

Notice of appeal was sent to the assessee through RPAD. Notice

was duly served as is evident from acknowledgement available on file.

Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of assessee, nor there

is any letter seeking adjournment on behalf of assessee. It appears that

assessee is not keen to pursue the matter in appeal. Therefore, we are

deciding this appeal on the basis of submissions made by the ld. DR

and material available on record.

3 ITA No.399/PUN/2016 A.Y.2009-10

5.

The Tribunal in ITA No. 799/PN/2014 for assessment year 2009- 10 has held that the additions proposed by Commissioner of Income Tax u/s. 40(a)(ia) and u/s.43B are not sustainable. Once, the revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 exercised by Commissioner of Income Tax is held to be bad in law, the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are vitiated. Hence, the proceedings arising from order of Commissioner of Income Tax u/s.263 would be invalid. Accordingly, present appeal filed by the Department is mis-conceived and is dismissed as not maintainable.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 6. Order pronounced on Thursday, the 08th day of February, 2018. Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नल चतुव�द� /ANIL CHATURVEDI) (�वकास अव�थी /Vikas Awasthy) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 08th February, 2018. SB आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT (Appeals)-1, Aurangabad. 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Aurangabad. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “ए” ब�च, 5. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6.

// स�या�पत ��त // True Copy //

आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

�नजी स�चव / Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →