DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI V. JAYARAM JAYALALITHA, CHENNAI

ITA 3085/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Chennai against Jayaram Jayalalitha, represented by Ms. Deepa and Mr. J. Deepak, concerning the Assessment Year 1997-98. The core issue revolved around the validity of the set aside assessment proceedings completed by the AO as per the directions of the CIT under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, which were later annulled by the ITAT Chennai. The tribunal's decision to dismiss the revenue's appeal was based on the fact that the foundational order for the AO's assessment had been annulled, rendering subsequent proceedings and appeals based on it invalid.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 822447 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: ITA Nos.477/Mds/2002
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARV SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: SATHYAKUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Revision of order
• Section: 143(3); 263

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ड ’ \u000eयायपीठ, चे\u000eनई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0001ी मनु क ुमार िग र, \u000eाियक सद\u0012 एवं \u0001ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद\u0012 क े सम BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3085/Chny/2025 िनधा\u0018रण वष\u0018/Assessment Year: 1997-98 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 2(2), Chennai v. Jayaram Jayalalitha, Represented by L/H 1. Ms. Deepa, 36, Poes Garden, Chennai 600086; 2. Mr. J. Deepak, Old No.9 New No.13, Sivagnanam Street, T.Nagar Chennai 600017, Tamil Nadu. [PAN: AAFPJ8988K] (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr. Sathya Kumar, Advocate यथ क ओर से /Revenue by : Mr. ARV Sreenivasan,CIT सुनवाईक तार ख/Date of Hearing : 17.12.2025 घोषणाक तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19, [CIT(A)] dated 19.08.2025 for Assessment Year 1997-98. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3085/Chny/2025 (AY 1997-98) Jayaram Jayalalitha :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, we find from the impugned order that the ld.CIT(A) has noted as under: “6.1 The undersigned has carefully examined the order of the AO and the order u/s 263 of the Act passed by the CIT, Central-II, Chennai. On examination of records, it can be seen that the AO completed the set aside assessment proceedings as per the direction(s) of the CIT, Central-II, Chennai in the order passed u/s 263 of the Act dated 21.03.2003. 6.2 The appellant has challenged the order u/s 263 of the Act before the Hon’ble ITAT Chennai. During the pendency of the appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT Chennai, the AO completed the set aside proceeding vide order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act on 21.03.2003. 6.3 The Hon’ble ITAT Chennai vide its order in ITA Nos.477/Mds/2002 dated 11.01.2008 has allowed the appeal of the appellant. During the course of appellate proceedings, the AR made available a copy of the order of the Hon’ble ITAT Chennai, vide letter dated 14.03.2008. On perusal of the order of the Hon’ble ITAT Chennai, passed in the case of appellant for the year under consideration, it is understood that the understood that the Hon’ble ITAT Chennai has annulled the order of the CIT passed u/s 263 of the Act. 6.4 The AO completed the set aside assessment on the basis of the order of order passed u/s 263 of the Act by the CIT, Central-II, Chennai. As the order u/s 263 of the Act of the CIT, Central-II, Chennai was annulled by the Hon’ble ITAT Chennai, the consequent order passed by the AO dated 21.03.2003 has become redundant. Therefore, all the ground raised by the appellant upon the addition(s)/disallowance(s) made by the AO in the set side assessment proceeding are hereby treated as allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal filed for the AY 1997-98 is treated as allowed.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3085/Chny/2025 (AY 1997-98) Jayaram Jayalalitha :: 3 :: 3. The ld.AR for the assessee pleaded that the present appeal has no legs to stand. Per contra, the ld.DR-CIT for the revenue stated that against the ITAT order in ITA Nos.477/Mds/2002 dated 11.01.2008, the appeal of the revenue is pending before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We are of the opinion that keeping this appeal pending is not justified. Therefore, we also dismiss the present revenue appeal in view of above factual matrix, however we grant liberty/leave to the revenue to revive this appeal if the order of the ITAT in ITA Nos.477/Mds/2002 dated 11.01.2008 is reversed by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced on the 22nd day of December, 2025, in Chennai. Sd/- (\u0001ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद)य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (मनु क ुमार िग र) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) \u000eयाियक सद)य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे\u000eनई/Chennai, *दनांक/Dated: 22nd December, 2025. EDN, Sr. PS Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3085/Chny/2025 (AY 1997-98) Jayaram Jayalalitha :: 4 :: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु\u000f/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय\bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "