9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment Years 2008-09 and 2010-11 respectively. Since both these appeals involve common issues, they are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. In both the appeals, the assessee has raised the following additional ground of appeal in addition to the grounds taken in Form No. 36: "That the Pr. CIT has no jurisdiction u/ s 263 of the Act to review and revise an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153C/153A of the Act dated 30.03.2015 which itself was illegal and bad in law due to invalid assumption of jurisdiction as contemplated u/s 153C/ 153A of the Act." 3. Since the additional ground goes to the root of the matter and requires no verification of any fact, the same is admitted for adju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessee for Assessment Year under consideration was taken up u/s^ 143(3). The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-8, New Delhi vide Order dated 20.12.2010 has assessed the income of the Assessee at Rs. 32,64,73,560/-." 10. The ld. PCIT invoked the provisions of section 263 of the Act and set aside the assessment order dated 30.03.2015 holding that because after the merger of M/s Sarla Fabrics Pvt Ltd with M/s Shahi Exports Pvt Ltd, whatever additions were made in the hands of M/s Sarla Fabrics Pvt Ltd were to be assessed in the hands of M/s Shahi Exports Pvt Ltd and accordingly, order of M/s Shahi Exports Pvt Ltd, as passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 153C of the Act, amounts to erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether it is pecuniary or territorial, or whether it is in respect of the subject-matter of the action, strikes at the very authority of the Court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties. " 16. In light of the aforesaid ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we are of the considered opinion that the assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act in respect of an assessment which is non-est is also bad in law as a non-est order cannot be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. An order framed u/s 263 of the Act for both the A.Ys 2008-09 and 2010-11 are accordingly quashed on the principle of Sublato Fundamento Cadit Opus, meaning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
