A Z FOODS ,SAMBHAL V. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BAREILLY

ITA 102/LKW/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s A Z Foods, which appealed against the order of the PCIT, Bareilly, for the assessment year 2017-18. The original assessment order determined the assessee's income at Rs.12,32,800, higher than the returned income. The PCIT later revised this order under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to inadequate inquiries by the Assessing Officer during the assessment, particularly concerning the quantitative details of goods traded and raw materials. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, supporting the PCIT's decision for a de novo assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708833 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE; SHAURYA SHASHWAT SHUKLA
• Keywords: Revision of order
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 M/s A Z Foods, Sarai Tareen, Sambhat Uttar Pradesh. PAN:AAPFA5573R Vs. Pr. C.I.T., Bareilly. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned order dated 14/03/2022 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2021-22/1040692203(1) passed by learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (“PCIT” for short), Bareilly u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short). Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Shaurya Shashwat Shukla, CIT (D.R.) I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 2 (A.1) In this case assessment order dated 28/12/2019 was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act whereby the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.12,32,795/- (rounded off to Rs.12,32,800/-), as against returned income of Rs.10,41,350/-. This order was revised by the learned Pr.CIT u/s 263 of the Act vide impugned order dated 14/03/2022. The relevant portion of the aforesaid impugned order of the learned Pr.CIT is reproduced as under: I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 3 I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 4 I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 5 I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 6 I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 7 (B) Although there are several ground of appeal, they are all aimed against action of the learned PCIT setting aside the assessment order to be I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 8 framed de novo. For the safe of convenience, all grounds of appeal are taken up together for deciding the appeal. At the time of hearing the assessee was represented by none. The learned CIT (D.R.) for Revenue drew our attention to the fact that the reason for selection of the case for scrutiny was that quantitative details of principal items of goods traded or raw material as well as finished goods were not submitted by the assessee. The learned CIT (D.R.) submitted that during the assessment proceedings, even this aspect was not examined by the Assessing Officer. He took us through the impugned order of the learned PCIT and placed heavy reliance on it. (C) We have perused the materials on record. We have heard learned CIT (D.R.). In the impugned order, learned PCIT has discussed in detail, how the Assessing Officer did not make inquiry even in respect of the reasons for which the case was selected for scrutiny. Further, the learned PCIT has also discussed in detail how the Assessing Officer did not make relevant inquiries which were required during the assessment proceedings, having regard to nature and scale of assessee’s business. No material has been brought for our consideration to persuade us to interfere with the impugned order of learned PCIT. Therefore, the impugned order is upheld. All the grounds of appeal are treated as disposed off accordingly. (D) In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. (Order was pronounced in the open court on 18/07/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated:18/07/2025 *Singh I.T.A. No.102/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2017-18 9 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow "