ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM V. V.NATARAJAN, RASIPURAM

MA 1/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two Miscellaneous Applications (MA No.1/Chny/2025 & MA No.176/Chny/2023) filed by the Revenue against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 30.11.2022, which had quashed the revisionary orders under section 263 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17. The Revenue contended that the Tribunal's earlier decision was based on an incorrect appreciation of facts. However, the Tribunal found that it had thoroughly analyzed the issues and materials presented, and there was no mistake apparent on the record that warranted a recall of the orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792283 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 01-01-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM S. MUKUNDAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN
• Keywords: Set aside; Revision of order
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./MA No.1/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2016-17 (ITA No.468/Chny/2021) & आयकर अपील सं./MA No.176/Chny/2023, Assessment Years: 2015-16 (ITA No.467/Chny/2021) Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Salem. Shri V.Natarajan, D.No.64C, Rotary Nagar, Rasipuram, Tamil Nadu-637 408. [PAN: ACGPN1477Q] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.T.S.lakshmi Venkatraman, FCA, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.Gautam S.Mukundan, JCIT. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 10.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 02.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : These two MAs bearing MA Nos.1 & 176 have been filed by the Revenue requesting for recalling of the order in ITA nos. 467 & 468 / Chny / 2021 dated 30.11.2022. Since the facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience, these two MAs were heard together and are being adjudicated by this common order. Printed from counselvise.com MA No.1/Chny/2025 & MA No.176/Chny/2023 Page - 2 - of 4 2.0 As per the brief factual matrix of the case, assessee had contested exercise of revisionary authority by the Ld.PCIT, Chennai u/s 263 in its case for AY-2015-16 & 2016-17 through his orders dated 30.03.2021. In short, the Ld.PCIT, Chennai had held that the assessing officer had not investigated issues concerning unexplained cash transactions during the assessment proceedings. The order of the Ld.AO was therefore set aside with the directions to pass fresh assessment order de novo. In appeal the assessee had contended that the assessment order of the Ld.AO did not fell into the category of an order being erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The Hon’ble Coordinate bench of this tribunal concurred with the views of the assessee in the light of material placed on records and quashed the order u/s 263 supra. The Revenue has made the present MA for recall of the order on the premise of same being passed with the mistake of not being based upon true appreciation of the facts of the case. The Ld.DR for the Revenue vehemently argued in support of its proposal to recall the order. 3.0 The Ld.Counsel for the assessee fiercely supported the decision of the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench as given in its order dated 30.11.2022 in ITA No.467- 468 / Chny / 2021 for AYs – 2015-16 & 2016-17 respectively. It was contended that the Revenue has not brought on record any evidence to indicate any mistake available in Printed from counselvise.com MA No.1/Chny/2025 & MA No.176/Chny/2023 Page - 3 - of 4 the order, which is amenable for correction u/s 254(2) of the Act. It was also contended that the Revenue is merely trying to get the review of order of this tribunal supra, an act not permissible by law. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. At the outset, the protest of the Ld.Counsel for the assessee that Revenue’s appeal in MA No.1 / 2025 is time barred as was filed beyond the prescribed timeline, has been found to be not correct as there is nothing credible on records to suggest the veracity of the averments made. Coming to the controversy regarding non- consideration of the material on record by this tribunal while passing the impugned order dated 30.11.2022, we have noted that the tribunal in paras 5 to 9 of its order from pages 4 to 8 has extensively analysed various facets of the controversy, judicial precedents covering the subject before quashing the revisionary order u/s 263. It has been lucidly brought on records that the Ld.AO had examined and conducted enquiries qua material available on records. The Ld.AO therefore was not found guilty of any non-consideration of material on record or any failure to conduct necessary enquiries. So being the case, the conclusion drawn by this tribunal has been found to be based upon true understanding and appreciation of facts on records. We have also noted that the Revenue has also not brought on record any evidence to suggest the veracity of its statements made in the MA Printed from counselvise.com MA No.1/Chny/2025 & MA No.176/Chny/2023 Page - 4 - of 4 and / or to demonstrate as to what is the mistake committed in the order of this tribunal that is amenable u/s 254(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the MA No.1 / Chny/2025 qua order of this tribunal in ITA No.468 / Chny / 2025 for AY-2016-17 and MA No.176 / Chny/ 2025 in ITA No.467 / Chny / 2025 for AY-2015-16 moved by the appellant Revenue stands dismissed. 5.0 In the result, the MAs in MA No.1 / Chny/2025 and in MA No.176 / Chny/ 2025 of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on 2nd , December-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (एबी टी. वर्की) (ABY T VARKEY) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 2nd , December-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF Printed from counselvise.com "