Ridhi Sidhi Vintrade Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat

ITA 161/SRT/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Ridhi Sidhi Vintrade Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat, concerning the assessment year 2009-10. The primary contention was the jurisdiction and validity of the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A), which was challenged on grounds that the original revision order under Section 263, leading to the impugned order, had been set aside. The Tribunal examined the procedural history, including the initial assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147, subsequent revisions, and the final assessment order which included significant additions under Section 68 of the Act. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the lack of jurisdiction for the CIT(A) to pass the order and the invalidity of the additions made post the quashing of the revision order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 302077 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 year(s) 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2011
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No. 947/Kol/2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revision of order; Set aside
• Section: 68; 263; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 161/Srt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) (Virtual hearing) M/s Ridhi Sidhi Vintrade Pvt. Ltd., Unit No. 1501, 15 th Floor, Diamond Heritage, 16, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001. PAN No. AAECR 1123 J Vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle-3, Surat. Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Assessee represented by Shri Sumer M Surana, AR Department represented by Shri Ashok B Koli, CIT-DR Date of hearing 29/11/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/11/2022 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 31/03/2022 for the Assessment year (AY) 2009-10. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-4, Surat was out of jurisdiction and bad in law. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the order ex-parte when submissions were made online which should have been considered by him. 3. For that even otherwise the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law when the original order passed u/s 263 giving rise to the impugned order u/s 263/144/147/143(3) itself was set aside. 4. For that the assessee prays to grant relief and quash the order passed by CIT(A) as invalid and void ab initio.” ITA No. 161/Srt/2022 M/s Ridhi Sidhi Vintrade P Ltd. Vs DCIT 2 2. At the outset of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that initially the Assessing officer completed assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) on 19/11/2011. The assessment order dated 29/11/2011 was revised by the learned CIT, Kolkata-III, under Section 263 of the Act vide order dated 13/03/2014 with direction to frame the assessment order afresh. The assessee challenged the order of ld. CIT under Section 263 before the Tribunal wherein the order of ld. CIT under Section 263 was quashed/set aside vide order dated 18/07/2018 in ITA No. 947/Kol/2014. The ld. AR further submits that in the meantime, the Assessing Officer passed the order giving effect in pursuance of direction of ld. CIT under Section 263 vide assessment order dated 18/03/2015 passed under Section 144/263/147/143(3) of the Act. In the order giving effect, the Assessing Officer made addition under Section 68 of the Act of Rs. 11.36 crores. Such addition made in the assessment order dated 18/03/2015 was challenged in the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by taking a view that the assessee has not made compliance despite repeated notices. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that the ld. CIT(A) was informed about quashing of order under Section 263 vide submission/reply dated 18/12/2021. The submission dated 18/12/2021 was duly uploaded on ITBA portal wherein the assessee specifically stated that the order of ld. CIT/PCIT dated ITA No. 161/Srt/2022 M/s Ridhi Sidhi Vintrade P Ltd. Vs DCIT 3 13.03.2013 has already been set aside, therefore, subsequent action or the additions in the assessment order will not survive. The ld. AR submits that copy of such application alongiwth proof of e-mail, is filed on record at page No. 20-21 of the paper book. The ld. AR further submits that the copy of order of Tribunal in ITA No. 947/Kol/2014 is also placed on record. 3. On the other hand, the learned Commissioner of Income-Departmental Representative (ld. CIT-DR) for the revenue supported the orders of lower authorities. The ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that in the present case, the assessment order was made by the ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata, therefore, the assessee should file appeal before the jurisdictional Tribunal. 4. In short rejoinder, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that the appeal of assessee was adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A)-4, Surat which is within the territorial jurisdiction of Surat Tribunal. Hence, once the first appeal is decided by the ld. CIT(A), Surat, the revenue is now precluded to raise such objection of jurisdiction. 5. We have considered the submission of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that the quantum addition challenged in the present appeal were made in the assessment order dated 18/03/2015 passed in pursuance of direction of ld. CIT-3, Kolkata under Section 263 dated 13/03/2014. Admittedly the ITA No. 161/Srt/2022 M/s Ridhi Sidhi Vintrade P Ltd. Vs DCIT 4 revision order passed under Section 263 has already been set aside by the Tribunal in ITA No. 947/Kol/2014, therefore, the subsequent action or addition made in the assessment order will not survive, therefore, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee is liable to be allowed. 6. So far as objection of ld. CIT-DR for the revenue that the Surat Bench has no jurisdiction as the assessment order was passed by the ITO, Ward-9(3), Kolkata, we do not find any merit in the objection of ld. CIT- DR for the revenue as the first appeal was adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A)- 4, Surat, which is within the jurisdiction of Surat Tribunal. Even otherwise on merit, the revenue has no case, therefore, we do not find any justification in raising such technical objection. 7. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29 th November, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat, Dated: 29/11/2022 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee – 2. Revenue - 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File By order Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Surat