YUSUF RAHIM SHAIKH,PUNE V. ITO, WARD-2, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 2161/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Yusuf Rahim Shaikh, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A) which upheld a rectification order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, related to a Notice of Demand under section 156. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by not considering the legal provisions of the Act and by upholding the rectification proceedings which were initiated without jurisdiction. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had previously set aside the original assessment order, which rendered the rectification order and the subsequent appeal infructuous.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 828904 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Pune
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AVIYOGI AMBADKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: KALPESH TURALKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Rectification of order
• Section: 147; 144; 154

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"बी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"B\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2161/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Yusuf Rahim Shaikh, Flat No.10 Vittal Park, New Sangvi, Pune-411027 Maharashtra PAN-AUJPS7790Q Vs ITO Ward 2(2), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kalpesh Turalkar (Virtual) Revenue by : Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 13.01.2026 Date of pronouncement : 14.01.2026 आदेश/ORDER PER DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Chennai dated 28.07.2025 framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2014-15 which is arising out of order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 20.12.2024. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Learned The ADDL/JCIT(A) -2, Chennai, (hereinafter referred to as the \"Ld. CIT(A)\"] has erred in law and on facts in passing the order dated 28.07.2025 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Impugned order\"), without considering legal provisions of the Act and uphold order dated 20.12.2024 and Notice of Demand dated 20.12.2024 issued under section 156 of the Act. The said Impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2161/PUN/2025 2. Appellate Order passed without providing an appropriate opportunity of being heard and is, hence bad in law The Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the impugned order without providing the Appellant an appropriate opportunity of being heard. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and the same may be quashed. 3. The learned CIT (A) erred in upholding proceedings under section 154 of the Act in respect of rectifying the Notice of Demand issued under section 156 of the Act, the Appellant submits that the learned A.O. has initiated the said proceeding without jurisdiction. Hence the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. 4. The learned CIT (A) erred in upholding order dated 20.12.2024 and Notice of Demand dated 20.12.2024 without considering the legal provisions of section 151A of the Act. The Appellant submits that as per Notification S.O. 1466(E) dated March 29, 2022 issued under section 151A of the Act, impugned rectification proceeding could only have been issued in a Faceless manner by a Faceless Assessing officer in accordance with section 144B of the Act. In the present case the rectification proceeding initiated by the Respondent is not the appropriate authority to initial rectification proceeding. Hence, the the impugned rectification proceedings are invalid and bad in law. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify and/or delete any of the Grounds of Appeal. 3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) filed against the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) in the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 22.02.2022, the assessee has been granted relief by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 31.12.2025 directing the AO to carry out afresh assessment proceedings. He therefore submitted that the instant appeal which is arising out of order u/s 154 r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 20.12.2024 deserves to be dismissed as infructuous. 4. On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) raised no objection. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The assessee has been subjected to assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2014-15 and vide order u/s Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2161/PUN/2025 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B dated 22.02.2022 Ld. AO assessed the income at Rs. 1,03,38,500/- against the ‘NIL’ income declared by the assessee. However Tax was computed treating the income at Rs. ‘NIL’. Ld. AO on noticing this apparent mistake passed the order u/s 154 revising the tax calculation. Aggrieved with the order u/s 154 assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed. Before us Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that against the addition made in the assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and recently vide order dated 31.12.2025, Ld. CIT(A) has set aside the assessment order and directed the Ld. AO to make afresh assessment after duly considering the details filed by the assessee. 6. Under the present consideration since the assessment order has been set aside, the order u/s 154 of the act becomes infructuous. Since the present appeal is arising out of said rectification order u/s 154 of the Act we dismiss the instant appeal treating it as infructuous. 7. In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced on this 14th day of January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक /Dated: 14th January, 2026. Neeta Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2161/PUN/2025 आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि /Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी /The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी /The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"बी\" बेंच, पुणे /DR, ITAT, \"B\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल /Guard File. आिेशािुसार /BY ORDER, Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे /ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "