GURBAKSHISH SINGH BATRA,DELHI vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-52(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3991/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 November 2025AY 2016-173 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 held that since the PCIT's revision directions were annulled by a coordinate bench, the subsequent assessment framed in compliance with those directions had no legal basis. Therefore, the impugned assessment was also quashed.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) framed an assessment under section 144 based on revision directions from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under section 263. The PCIT had deemed a prior assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. The assessee appealed this revision direction.

What were the issues?

Whether an assessment framed under section 144 based on PCIT's revision directions is valid if those directions are subsequently annulled.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. Rajinder Kaur, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 20.11.2025Pronounced: 20.11.2025

Assessment Year: 2016-17 Gurbakshish Singh Batra, Vs. ACIT, E-1511, Wazir Nagar, Circle-52(1), Kotla, Mubarakpur, Delhi Delhi PAN :ADSPB2480J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Rajiv Jain, CA Department by Ms. Rajinder Kaur, CIT(DR) Date of hearing 20.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 20.11.2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1076512196(1), dated 28.05.2025 involving proceedings under section 144 r.w.s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires during the course of hearing that there is hardly any need to delve with the relevant factual matrix at length in the assessee’s appeal. This is for the precise reason that the assessing authority has framed the impugned assessment dated 30th March, 2022 in compliance to the learned PCIT’s section 263 revision directions dated 22nd March, 2021 terming the former assessment completed on 28.11.2018 as an erroneous one causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue.

3.

It is in this factual backdrop that the assessee has invited our attention to the learned coordinate bench’s order in his appeal decided on 31st March, 2022 against the department thereby annulling the PCIT’s foregoing revision directions itself. We thus conclude that the impugned consequential assessment has no legs to stand once the learned PCIT’s revision direction already quashed. We thus conclude that the impugned latter assessment dated 30.03.2022 must also follow the suit in very terms. Ordered accordingly. All other pleadings on merits between the parties stand rendered academic.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →