9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee's appeal by relying the decision of ITAT Cochin bench's order No. ITA 633/Coch/2022 dated 08.03.2023, in the assessee's own case against the order u/s 263 of the IT Act dated 21.03.2022. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the fact that the department has filed an appeal against the ITAT's decision in ITA 633/Coch/2022 dated 08.03.2023 which is still pending in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala under ITA 27/2023 dated 19.10.2023, seeking the restoration of the order u/s 263 of the IT Act. 4. The Ld.CIT(A) failed to consider the substantive issues raised in the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the IT Act dated 01.03.2023, which pertained to the applicability of the definition of charitable purpose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... keep the proceedings in abeyance till 15/03/2023 since the appeal against the order made u/s. 263 was pending before the Tribunal. The assessment unit without considering the request made by the assessee had passed the order u/s. 143(3) by denying the exemption claimed u/s. 11 and also relying on the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act. 4. In the meanwhile, on 08/03/2023, the Tribunal had passed an order in ITA No. 633/Coch/2022 in which the Tribunal had set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(E) u/s. 263 of the Act. In view of the subsequent development, the order passed by the assessment unit on 01/03/2023 in which the exemption claimed u/s. 11 was denied becomes illegal and therefore the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es no interference. 7. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record. 8. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessment unit has made the assessment u/s. 143(3) on 01/03/2023 in which the exemption claimed u/s. 11 was disallowed by relying on the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act, which was made based on the order passed by the Ld.CIT(E) u/s. 263 of the act. The appellate authority viz., the Tribunal, which heard the challenge made to the order passed u/s. 263, set aside the said order and therefore the consequential order passed is not a valid order. When the main order which authorises the AO to make the assessment was not there, the consequential order would not stand by itse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d fault with the order of the Ld.CIT(A). We are not accepting the argument advanced by the Ld.DR for the simple reason that as on date, the order of the Tribunal was not set aside and a mere filing of the appeal would not be a reason for terming the order of the Ld.CIT(A) as illegal. We also found that the Ld.CIT(A) had explained the reasons in his order for allowing the appeal filed by the assessee which was not disputed by the Ld.DR and in that circumstances, we have no hesitation to dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue and we confirm the finding of the Ld.CIT(A) as a valid one.
10. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11th March, 2025. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
