JETTY RAVIKANTH,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. PRINICIPA COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 120/VIZ/2022Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 September 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw its appeal. This was because the Assessing Officer had completed the revisionary assessment proceedings and passed a fresh assessment order, rendering the appeal against the PCIT's revisionary order infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in the cigarette business, filed its return for AY 2017-18. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, finding the original assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The PCIT set aside the assessment for further verification.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed against the PCIT's revisionary order is maintainable when a fresh assessment order has been passed. The maintainability of the appeal in light of subsequent developments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE

Hearing: 21.09.2023Pronounced: 27.09.2023

अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : None प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent by : Dr.Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date of Hearing : 21.09.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member :

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), Visakhapatnam-1 vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2021-22/1042087550(1) dated 30.03.2022, arising out of assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 26.12.2019 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18.

Jetty Ravikanth, Rajahmundry

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual engaged in purchase and sale of cigarettes on wholesale and retail business, filed it’s return of income for the A.Y.2017-18 on 04.11.2017, declaring taxable income of Rs.10,88,020/- under the heads income from business or profession and income from other sources. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify the issue of cash deposit during the demonetization period. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act and assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) on 26.12.2019 by assessing income at Rs.26,99,012/- after estimating the income on enhanced turnover.

3. Under the powers vested with the PCIT as per the provisions of section 263 of the Act, the Ld.PCIT called for the assessment records and examined the same and held that the assessment completed for the A.Y.2017-18 u/s 143(3) dated 26.12.2019 is not only erroneous but also prejudicial to the itnerest of the revenue. He, therefore, set aside the assessment to the file of the assessing officer to verify the assessee’s claims i.e. (i) the cash deposits reflected in all of his bank accounts represents the assessee’s business turnover (ii) the credits reflected to the extent of Rs.6,94,04,860/- are loans raised by the assessee (ii) the credits reflected in all of his bank accounts to the extent of Jetty Ravikanth, Rajahmundry Rs.6,18,36,000/- on account of inter-bank transfers within his own accounts and (iv) to invoke penalty u/s 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as per the directions and directed the AO to afford sufficient opportunity to the assessee and pass consequential order.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.PCIT, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and by the time the appeal came up for hearing the assessee filed a letter dated 20.09.2023 before the Tribunal and submitted that the Assessing Officer had completed the revisionary assessment proceedings and passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18 and hence, the assessee pleaded for withdrawal the appeal filed against the order u/s 263 of the Act for the A.Y.2017-18 passed by the Ld.PCIT, Visakhapatnam for which the Ld.DR has not raised any objection.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Since the assessee filed a letter before the Tribunal and submitted that the Assessing Officer had completed the revisionary assessment proceedings and passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2017-18 and pleaded for withdrawal of the appeal filed against the order u/s 263 of Jetty Ravikanth, Rajahmundry the Act for the A.Y.2017-18 passed by the Ld.PCIT, Visakhapatnam, we have no hesitation to permit the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal filed against the order u/s 263.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27th September, 2023.

Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृष्णन) (दुव्वूरु आर.एल रेड्डी) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 27.09.2023 L.Rama, SPS की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. ननधधाऩरती/ The Assessee – Shri Jetty Ravikanth, D.No.35-11-12, Mangalavarapupeta, Rajahmundry 2. रधजस्व/The Revenue – The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam 3. नवभधगीय प्रनतनननध, आयकर अपीलीय अनधकरण, नवशधखधपटणम / DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 4..गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधनुसधर / BY ORDER

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →