DY. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , COIMBATORE vs. M/S POOJA MARKETING, MALAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 959/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 June 2024AY 2014-15Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) correctly quashed the assessment order because the revision order under Section 263, which formed the basis for the fresh assessment, had been quashed by a higher tribunal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment order was revised under Section 263. Subsequently, a fresh assessment was framed. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who quashed the assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether a consequential assessment order can survive if the revision order under Section 263 is quashed.

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, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ/वाल ,लेखा सद3 एवं माननीय +ी मनु कुमार िग7र, �ाियक सद3 के सम8। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2014-15) DCIT M/s. Pooja Marketing बनाम/ Central Circle-2 #181/1450, Ground floor, Coimbatore. Motilal Nagara No.1, Goregaon West, Vs. Mumbai-400 104. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAOFP-2090-F (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Sridharan (Sr. Advocate), Shri Ravi Sawana & Ms. Krishna Laasye (Advocates)- Ld. ARs � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)-Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 18-06-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue assail an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai on 29-08-2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 30-11-2019. The registry has noted delay of 7 days in the appeal which stand condoned.

2.

Upon perusal of case records, it emerges that the assessee’s case was scrutinized u/s 143(3) and an assessment was framed against the assessee on 27-12-2016. However, the order was subjected to revision u/s 263 by Ld. Pr. CIT-31 vide order dated 30-03-2019. Pursuant to the same, another assessment was framed against the assessee u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 30-11-2019 making certain addition to income of the assessee. The assessee challenged the same before Ld. CIT(A) which was disposed-off vide impugned order dated 29-08-2022.

3.

The Ld. CIT(A), in para-5.1 of the order noted that the revision order passed u/s 263 was quashed by Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in ITA No.2596/Mum/2019. Considering the same, Ld. CIT(A) held that since the orders passed u/s 263 was quashed, the consequential assessment framed by Ld. AO would have no legs to stand. Accordingly, the assessment order was also quashed. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us.

4.

The aforesaid position remains uncontroverted before us. It is undisputed position that the revision order passed by appropriate authority has been quashed by Mumbai Tribunal in ITA No.2596/Mum/2019. Accordingly, consequential assessment framed by Ld. AO would not survive. Nothing has been shown to us that the aforesaid order has been reversed by any higher judicial authority, in any manner. Therefore, we see no reason to interfere in the impugned order.

5.

The appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 18th June, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद3 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद3 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :18-06-2024 DS आदेशकीSितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →