WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. CIT, KOLKATA-1, KOLKATA
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal as infructuous because the AO, in the subsequent proceedings initiated by the CIT's order, did not take any adverse view on the disputed issues.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment order was reviewed by the CIT under Section 263, who believed it was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue regarding unabsorbed depreciation and loan repayment. The CIT directed the AO to re-examine these issues.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT's order under Section 263 was justified in directing a re-examination of unabsorbed depreciation and loan repayment, and whether the appeal became infructuous due to subsequent AO actions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH : KOLKATA
Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ]
Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM
This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 17.02.2015 of C.I.T.- Kolkata-I, Kolkata passed u/s 263 of the Act.
The assessee is a statutory corporation established by an act of state of West Bengal. It is engaged in the business of transmission of electricity. The assessment for A.Y.2010-11 was completed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act by order dated 23.03.2013. 3. The CIT in exercise of his powers u/s 263 of the Act was of the view that the aforesaid order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in as much as the AO before concluding the assessment failed to consider carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation as per the books of accounts and that the AO failed to examine the accrual of income in the hands of the assessee u/s 41(1) of the Act in respect of re- payment of loans from Power Finance Corporation Limited. In the impugned order, the CIT directed the AO to make enquiries on the aforesaid two issues afresh. Aggrieved on the aforesaid order of the CIT the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as follows :-
2 West Bengal State Electricity Transmission Co.Ltd. A.Yr.2010-11 “1. That the Commissioner of Income-tax was wrong in passing an Order U/S 263 setting aside the Assessment Order passed U/S 143(3)/ 1115JB dated 23/03/2013.
2. That without prejudice to the contention raised in Ground No.l above, the Commissioner of Income-tax failed to appreciate that the difference of amounts as regards Unabsorbed Depreciation referred to by him, had been in relation to the Unabsorbed Depreciation as per the Books of Accounts and not in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act and thus he erred in considering such difference as allegedly appearing to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.
That without prejudice to the contentions raised in Ground No.1 above, the Commissioner of Income-tax failed to appreciate that the difference in the balance of PFCL Loan as calculated by him, had arisen due to the fact of his not taking into account the actual repayments of Loan made during the year and thus he erred in considering that such difference as allegedly appearing to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.
That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or withdraw any ground or grounds of Appeal before or at the hearing of the Appeal.”
At the time of hearing the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that in the set aside proceedings pursuant to the order of CIT the AO has not taken any adverse view on both the aforesaid issues and therefore the present appeal filed by the assessee has become infructuous. In view of the above submission we dismiss this appeal as infructuous.
In the result the appeal by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 03.02.2017. Sd/- Sd/- [M.Balaganesh] [ N.V.Vasudevan ] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 03.02.2017. [RG PS] Copy of the order forwarded to: 1.West Bengal State Electricity Transmission Co.Ltd., Vidyut Bhavan, 9th Floor, ‘A ‘Block, Salt Lake, Sector-II, Block ‘DJ ‘, Kolkata-700091. 2. C.I.T., Kolkata-I, Kolkata. 3..CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026