SAREGAMA INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 3, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1148/KOL/2006Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 December 2016AY 2001-023 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal as the revenue could not confirm if they had filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee was granted liberty to recall the order if the revenue had indeed filed an appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the CIT under Section 263. Subsequently, the AO passed an assessment order, which was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A), who granted some relief. The assessee stated they would withdraw their appeal if the revenue did not appeal the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal against the CIT's Section 263 order should be pursued when the subsequent assessment order has been appealed before the CIT(A) and the revenue's appellate status is unclear.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri Aby T.Varkey, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM ]

Date of Hearing : 19.12.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 30.12.2016. ORDER

Per Aby T.Varkey, JM

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the Assessee against the order of C.I.T.-1, Kolkata u/s 263 of the Act dated 31.03.2008 for AY 2001-02.

2.

At the outset, we would like to take note of the order sheet entry dated 24.11.2016 which reads as under :- “This is an appeal against an order u/s 263 of the Act. The Ld. Sr.Counsel for assessee submitted that pursuant to the order u/s 263 of the Act the AO passed an order of Assessment and the assessee challenged the additions made therein before CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed certain reliefs to the assessee. If the department does not file any further appeal before ITAT against the order of the CIT(A) the assessee will not pursue this appeal. The Ld. DR sought time to verify if any appeal against the order of CIT(A) has been filed by the revenue. According the appeal is adjourned to 19.12.2016. Date was announced in open court.”

3.

In the back drop of the aforesaid facts on query from the Bench as to whether the revenue has filed any appeal against the order of CIT(A), the ld. DR was not able to positively state as to whether the appeal has been filed or not. According to the ld. AR, to the best of his knowledge the revenue has not preferred any appeal against the order of CIT(A). In such a scenario the ld. AR wishes to withdraw the appeal with a liberty that it can move appropriate application to recall the order if the Revenue had in fact filed any appeal.

Saregama India Ltd. A.Yr.2001-02 4. We have heard the parties and perused the records. Since the AO has passed an order pursuant to the impugned order passed by CIT u/s 263 of the Act which inturn has been challenged by the assessee before CIT(A) and the assessee claims to have got certain relief from CIT(A). The assessee’s stand before this Tribunal was that if the revenue is not in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of CIT(A), the assessee would not pursue this appeal preferred against 263 order of the CIT. We had given opportunity to the revenue to find out whether the revenue has preferred any appeal. However, the revenue is not in a position to state positively as to whether they have filed any appeal against the order of CIT(A). In the light of the facts and circumstances, and since it is a very old appeal we are inclined to allow the prayer of the assessee to withdraw this appeal with the liberty given to the assessee that in case the revenue files/or had filed an appeal against the order of CIT(A) then it is at liberty to file appropriate application to recall this order. With this observation we are inclined to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

5.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the Court on 30.12.2016.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →