DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SHRIRAM FINANCE LTD, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1804/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 September 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)4 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 order under Section 263 was quashed, the Revenue's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, which was based on the Section 263 order, did not survive.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted additions made by the AO. The AO had made additions under Section 263 of the Act, which was later quashed by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal by the Revenue can survive when the underlying order (Section 263) that formed the basis of the AO's assessment has been quashed by a higher tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, HON’BLE & SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE

Hearing: 19.09.2024Pronounced: 20.09.2024

आदेश /O R D E R

PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 03.05.2024 and pertains to assessment year 2017-18.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case.

:-2-: ITA. No: 1804/Chny/2024

2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the issue on merit, without· considering the point that the order of the ITAT wherein the 263 was quashed, was not accepted by the Revenue and further appeal was filed by the Revenue.

3. The ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the point that in the event of reversal of the order of the ITAT wherein the 263 was quashed, by higher appellate forum, the consequential order shall not revive automatically, hence the CIT(A) ought to have heard the case on merit.

4. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.”

3.

The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a company filed its return of income and the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was concluded on 31.12.2019. The ld.PCIT, had invoked a provision of section 263 of the Act and treated the order u/s. 143(3) of the Act as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue and passed an order u/s.263 of the Act o 31.03.2022 by setting aside the order of the AO.

4.

The AO based on the order u/s. 263 of the Act of ld.PCIT passed an order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act for the assessment year 2017-18 by making a disallowance u/r. 8D of the I.T. Rules and recomputed the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee

:-3-: ITA. No: 1804/Chny/2024 preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) has deleted the addition made by the AO and allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the revenue preferred an appeal before us.

5.

Meanwhile, the assessee challenged the order u/s. 263 of the Act of ld.PCIT before this Tribunal and the Tribunal had quashed the order of ld.PCIT vide dated 03.05.2023. We note that, as the order u/s. 263 of the Act of the ld.PCIT has been quashed, appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the ld.CIT(A) do not survive and hence, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →