AJIBAR RAHAMAN vs. ITO, WD-49(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1110/KOL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 July 2017AY 2009-20102 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 accepted the assessee's plea that the appeal had become academic. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order passed by the CIT under Section 263. The CIT had directed the AO to examine the correctness of a commission payment deduction claimed by the assessee. Subsequently, the AO completed the assessment and did not find any discrepancy, leaving the original deduction undisturbed.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal against a CIT(A) order under Section 263 is infructuous when the subsequent assessment by the AO does not disturb the original assessment.

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

Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM]

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM] Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ajibar Rahaman -vs.- C.I.T., Kolkata-XVII, Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AKCPR 1794 A] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Appellant : Shri I.Banerjee, FCA For the Respondent : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 26.07.2017. Date of Pronouncement : 28.07.2017. ORDER Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM

This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 26.03.2014 of C.I.T., Kolkata-XVII, Kolkata passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act ‘).

2.

At the time of hearing of the appeal the ld. Counsel for the assessee brought to our notice the fact that in the impugned order the CIT had directed the AO to examine the correctness of the claim of assessee for deduction of a sum of Rs.53,18,300/- being commission payment to others. It is also brought to our notice pursuant to the order of CIT u/s 263 of the Act the AO completed the assessment by an order dated 14.11.2014 and in that order the AO did not find any discrepancy and the commission payment which was allowed in the original assessment proceedings, was not disturbed. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this appeal by the assessee in the above circumstances is academic and therefore has to be dismissed as infractuous. We accept the plea of the assessee and dismiss the appeal of the assessee as infractuous.

Order pronounced in the Court on 28.07.2017.

Sd/- Sd/- [Waseem Ahmed] [ N.V.Vasudevan ] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 28.07.2017. [RG PS] Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Ajibar Rahaman, Vill-Singherati, P.O.Gobila, P.S.Deganga, Barasat, Nor 24 Parganas-743424

2. C.I.T., Kolkata-XVII, Kolkata.

3.

CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, 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 →