Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) v. ITO

99 ITD 621Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2006#3225 most cited

What is Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) v. ITO authority for?

When an assessment order under section 147 of the Income-tax Act is void or without jurisdiction, the Principal Commissioner cannot revise such an order under section 263 as it is a non-est order.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) v. ITO · section 147 · section 263 · void assessment order · non-est order · without jurisdiction · revisionary powers

Also reported as

101 TTJ 450

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 144BSection 151Section 143(3)Section 148ASection 151ASection 263

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhc(3)inadequate enquirysection 80hhcrevision under section 263revision u/s 263first proviso to section 147assessment order erroneouspermanent account numbernon application of mindsection 151alack of enquirysection 10(38)

Judgments citing Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) v. ITO

Bee Pee Textiles, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT- 18, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 2485/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S. Bee Pee Textiles Vs. Pr. Cit – 18, 384-F, Room No. 4,5 &6 Room No. 601, 6Th Dhabholkar, Wadi, Floor, Earnest House, Kalbadevi, Mumbai – Nariman Point, 4000024. Mumbai – 400021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaffb3061R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Mukesh Advani. Ar Respondent By : Shri Rahul Raman. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 15.11.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax– 18, Mumbai Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Advani. ARFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40Section 40b

…/s 143(3) of the Act, to challenge the validity of the expansion of order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act covering the points which are not part of the AIR. In this regard we find that Lucknow Bench of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) Bee Pee Textiles, Mumbai and ITAT Mumbai 'G' Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016 have taken a view that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the Ld.CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In the second decis…

Concord Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-3, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 174/KOL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am]

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 263

…as well as initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. In this regard other than the case laws cited supra, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed before us two decisions one rendered by Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai ‘ G ‘ Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016. In both the decisions a view has been taken by the Tribunal that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was without jurisdiction, the Ld. PCIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void o…

M/S Rosemary Vincom LLP, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 47(5), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 65/KOL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…/s 143(3) of the Act, to challenge the validity of the expansion of order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act covering the points which are not part of the AIR. In this regard we find that Lucknow Bench of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai 'G' Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016 have taken a view that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the Ld.CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In the second decision cited the Hon'ble Mum…

Tej Paul Bhardwaj, Sunam vs. Pr. CIT, Patiala

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 463/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: The Ao & Furnished The Details Called

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Dahiya CIT (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54

…s 143(3) of the Act, to challenge the validity of the expansion of order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act covering the points which are not part of the AIR. In this regard we find that Lucknow Bench of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai 'G' Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.l.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016 have taken a view that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the Ld. CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In the second decision cited the Hon'ble Mu…

Mikado Realtors (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT (Central), Gurugram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 50/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Adv. & Shri LalitFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT-D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 153CSection 153C(1)Section 263

…d not be the subject matter of assessment u/s 153A, obviously, the order passed u/s 153A is not revisable by invoking the provisions of section 263. It has been so held in ‘Paul John Delicious Cashew v. ITO’ 94 ITD 131 (Cochi) and ‘Inder Kumar Bachani v. ITO’ 99 ITD 621 (Lkw)” ii) ITA No. 4562/D/2011 dated 24.9.2015 Krishna Kumar Saraf v. CIT "17. There is no quarrel with the proposition advanced by Id. DR that the proceedings u/s 263 are for the benefit of revenue and not for assessee. 18. However, u/s 263 the Id. Commissioner cannot revise a non est order in the eve of law. Since the assessment order was passed…

Binod Kumar Mahato, Burdwan vs. Principal CIT - Burdwan, Burdwan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2173/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Feb 2021AY 2014-15
Section 144Section 250Section 263Section 271ASection 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’ble Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Binod Kumar Mahato.............................................……….............................………………….............Appellant Malancha, Kanainatshal DVC More P.O. Sripalli Burdwan - 713103 [PAN : AOHPM 2872 B] Vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Burdwan,................……………...................………..…......Respondent Appearances by: Shri Soumitro Choudhury, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Tushar Dhwal Sing…

DCIT, Central Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Alembic Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue fails

ITA 1826/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Central Cir-1(1), Kolkata Vs. M/S. Alembic Merchants Pvt. Ltd Pan: Aacca 0918Q Appellant Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 68

…the order passed u/s.147 of the Act as well as initiation of proceedings u/.s 147 of the Act. In this regard the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed before us two decisions one rendered by Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai ‘G’ Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016. In both the decisions a view has been taken by the Tribunal that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In t…

Sanjay Kumar Surana, Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT-12, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 902/KOL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, V.P (Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm ]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…this proposition, we rely on the decision of Kolkata Tribunal in M/s. Classic Flower & Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT ITA No. 764-766/Kol/2014 dated 05.04.2017; and that of Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Indar Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs. ITO reported in 99 ITD 621 and decision of ITAT Mumbai 'G' Bench in the case of West Life Development Ltd. Vs. PCIT in ITA No. 688/Mum/2016. 14. We also take note of the ratio laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kiran Singh & Ors., Chaman Paswar & Ors (1955) 1 SCR 117 wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as follows :- "It is a fundamental principle to es…

Tech Mahindra Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 7249/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodtech Mahindra Ltd. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Gateway Building, Room No. 344, Aayakar Bhavan Apollo Bunder, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai – 400001 Mumbai – 400020

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry &For Respondent: Shri R.Manjunatha Swami, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 7249/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 Tech Mahindra Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT-2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member Tech Mahindra Ltd. Pr. Commissioner of Income tax-2, Gateway Building, Room No. 344, Aayakar Bhavan Apollo Bunder, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai – 400001 Mumbai – 400020 PAN – AAACM3484F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri J.D. Mistry & Shri Harsh Kapadia, A.Rs Respondent by: Shri R.Manjunatha Swami, D.R Date of Hearing: 18.09.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 11.10.2019 O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD,…

Essar Shipping Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 3156/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Essar Shipping Limited V. Pr. Cit-5 Essar House, 11, K.K. Marg Room No. 501 Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 034 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aacce3707D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta Department By : Shri D.G. Pansari

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Section 143(1)Section 144C(1)Section 263Section 92C

…the order passed u/s.147 of the Act as well as initiation of proceedings u/.s 147 of the Act. In this regard the ld. Counsel for the assessee placed before us two decisions one rendered by Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai ‘G Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016. In both the decisions a view has been taken by the Tribunal that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In th…

Mrs. Sonali Hemant Bha vs. Ar, Mumbai

In the result, assessee's appeal stands allowed

ITA 742/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Chothani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, D.R
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 263

…/s 143(3) of the Act, to challenge the validity of the expansion of order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act covering the points which are not part of the AIR. In this regard we find that Lucknow Bench of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai 'G' Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016 have taken a view that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the Ld.CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In the second decision cited the Hon'ble Mum…

Sri Udit Kumar Dugar, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 36(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 799/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…1 Shri Udit Kumar Dugar, AY 2012-13 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 799/Kol/2018 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Shri Udit Kumar Dugar Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-36(4), (PAN: ACWPD5996Q) Kolkata Appellant Respondent For the Appellant Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate For the Respondent Shri Sankar Halder, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.02.2019 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2019 ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This appeal o…

M/S. Devansh Exports, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 32, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2178/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…1 Devansh Exports, AY 2010-11 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/and "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM] I.T.A. No. 2178/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Devansh Exports Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income- (PAN: AACFD1870B) tax, Circle-32, Kolkata. Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 07.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement 15.10.2018 For the Appellant Shri Ketan K. Ved, AR For the Respondent Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri A.…

Sanjeev Kumar Khemka, Kolkata vs. CIT-15, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 1361/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2011-12

Section 143(3)Section 263

…/s 143(3) of the Act, to challenge the validity of the expansion of order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act covering the points which are not part of the AIR. In this regard we find that Lucknow Bench of Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai ‘G‘ Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016 have taken a view that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the Ld.CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In the second decision cited the Hon’ble Mum…

M/S Classic Flour and Food Processing Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-11(4), Kolkata

In the result, ITA No. 765 & 766/Kol/2014 are allowed while ITA

ITA 764/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Apr 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…this regard the ld. Counsel for ITA Nos.764 to 766/Kol/2014 M/s. Classic Flour & Food Processing P.Ltd.A.Y.2007-08 to 2009-10 5 the assessee placed before us two decisions one rendered by Lucknow Bench of ITAT in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) vs ITO 99 ITD 621 (Luck) and ITAT Mumbai ‘ G ‘ Bench in the case of M/s. Westlife Development Ltd. Vs Principal C.I.T. in ITA NO.688/Mum/2016. In both the decisions a view has been taken by the Tribunal that when an Assessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act was illegal the CIT cannot invoke the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act against such void or non-est order. In…

M/S New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1023/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80H

…ted being without jurisdiction, in our view the Ld. CIT thus cannot invoke jurisdiction u/s 263 against such void or non-est order. Support in this regard is derived from the decision of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) reported in 99 ITD 621 (Lucknow).This appeal 28 ITA No.5126/Del./11 & 1023/Del./2013 therefore merits to be disposed of on this aspect itself. However, since elaborate arguments have been advanced before us we are inclined to render our opinion on merits of the appeal as well. 14. Action under 263 of the Act has been initiated by the Ld. CIT in the instant case vide s…

New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5126/DEL/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80H

…ted being without jurisdiction, in our view the Ld. CIT thus cannot invoke jurisdiction u/s 263 against such void or non-est order. Support in this regard is derived from the decision of ITAT, Lucknow Bench in the case of Inder Kumar Bachani (HUF) reported in 99 ITD 621 (Lucknow).This appeal 28 ITA No.5126/Del./11 & 1023/Del./2013 therefore merits to be disposed of on this aspect itself. However, since elaborate arguments have been advanced before us we are inclined to render our opinion on merits of the appeal as well. 14. Action under 263 of the Act has been initiated by the Ld. CIT in the instant case vide s…