LAXMIKANT SHARMA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 24(2)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7418/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 January 2017AY 2005-063 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT's order under section 263 had been quashed by a previous ITAT order. Consequently, the assessment proceedings initiated pursuant to the CIT's order became infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The original assessment order had allowed a deduction under section 80IB, which was later cancelled by the CIT under section 263.

What were the issues?

Whether assessment proceedings initiated based on a CIT's revisionary order, which is subsequently quashed by the Tribunal, are rendered infructuous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 80IB,Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “H”, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri A K Sharma, AR
For Respondent: Shri M C Omi Nigshen
Hearing: 17.01.2017Pronounced: 17.01.2017

Per Amit Shukla, Judicial Member

1.

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against impugned order dated 13.10.2014, passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals)-34, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the I.,T.Act for A.Y. 2005-06.

2.

Before us, the learned counsel submitted that the impugned proceedings is arising out of order u/s. 263 passed by learned CIT-24 in his revisionary jurisdiction. He pointed out that the order of the learned CIT was challenged before the Tribunal in wherein, the Tribunal vide order dated 18.11.2016 has quashed the order of the learned CIT and restored the assessment order allowing quantum of deduction u/s. 80IB.

3.

Before us, the learned DR admitted that the impugned assessment proceedings are arising out of the order u/s. 263 and once such order has been passed then the impugned proceedings have become infructuous.

4.

After considering the aforesaid facts and material on record, we find that the AO in his order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 254 (in pursuance of ITAT’s direction), had allowed the deduction u/s. 80IB.

Thereafter, the learned CIT in his revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 had cancelled the said assessment order and directed the AO to pass a fresh assessment. This order of the learned CIT now stands cancelled by the Tribunal and whence the order u/s. 263 itself has been quashed then as a consequence all such proceedings initiated in pursuance of such an order have been rendered infructuous.

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed and the impugned orders are set aside.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on this 17th day of January 2017

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →