Principal Commissioner Ofincome Tax-1, Kolkata v. M/S. Samayak Sales Pvt.ltd

ITAT/32/2023IA No.GA/1/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-1, KOLKATA -Versus- M/S. SAMAYAK SALES PVT.LTD. BEFORE :THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 15[th] March, 2023 Appearance :Mr. Prithu Dudheria, Adv....for the appellant Mr. Pranit Bag, Adv.Mr. Taraknath Jaiswal, Adv.Mr. Subhamay Patra, Adv....for the respondent. The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue underSection 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ forbrevity) is directed against the order dated 19[th] July, 2022passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata(the Tribunal) in ITA No.147/Kol/2021 for the assessment year2011-12. The revenue has raised the following substantialquestions of law for consideration: (i)Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Learned Income Tax AppellateTribunal has erred in law in quashing theorder passed by the Pr.CIT-I, under Section263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 withoutconsidering the fact that the order passed bythe Assessing Officer is erroneous andprejudicial to the interest of revenue ?of the case the Learned Income Tax AppellateTribunal has erred in law in quashing theorder passed by the Pr.CIT-I, under Section263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 withoutconsidering the fact that the order passed bythe Assessing Officer is erroneous andprejudicial to the interest of revenue ?(ii)Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Learned Income Tax AppellateTribunal has erred in law in deleting theaddition of Rs.5,61,375/- made by the Pr.CIT-I, under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,1961 amount received on account of sale ofshares of M/s. S.V. Electricals Ltd. (now,M/s. Nvyah Infrastructure and Telecom ServicesLtd.) ?of the case the Learned Income Tax AppellateTribunal has erred in law in deleting theaddition of Rs.5,61,375/- made by the Pr.CIT-I, under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act,1961 amount received on account of sale ofshares of M/s. S.V. Electricals Ltd. (now,M/s. Nvyah Infrastructure and Telecom ServicesLtd.) ? Learned counsel for the respondent is granted leave tofile vakalatnama by 16[th] March, 2023. We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudheria, learned standingcounsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Pranit Bag, learnedcounsel assisted by Mr. Taraknath Jaiswal and Mr. SubhamayPatra, learned Advocates for the respondent/assessee.The short issue which falls for consideration in theinstant case is whether the assumption of jurisdiction by thePrincipal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of theAct was valid and legal. The Tribunal considered the factualposition and found that very same issue was the subject-matter of re-assessment proceedings and during the re-assessmentproceedings the Assessing Officer considered the documents andno addition was made on the issue raised for the reasonsrecorded for exercising power under Section 263 of the Act.Therefore, the learned Tribunal came to the conclusion thatsince in the re-assessment proceedings no addition was made onthe said ground, the same cannot be the subject-matter ofrevision under Section 263 of the Act. The finding rendered bythe Tribunal is perfectly valid and legal and calls for nointerference. For the above reason, the appeal (ITAT/32/2023) filedby the revenue is dismissed and the substantial questions oflaw are answered against the revenue.Consequently, the connected application for stay (IANo.GA/1/2023) also stands closed. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) As./AKG.