ITO Vs Pantime Finance Company Pvt Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai upheld CIT(A)’s order deleting additions made pursuant to a revision u/s 263, holding that once the base revision order itself is quashed by Tribunal, all consequential proceedings automatically fail. The reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 263 & 144B had added substantial income after PCIT invoked revision alleging lack of enquiry and non-compliance with penny stock SOP guidelines.
Tribunal noted that earlier co-ordinate bench had already quashed the revision order u/s 263 on both legal and factual grounds, including incorrect application of CBDT penny stock SOP to unlisted scrips. Therefore, the subsequent reassessment order had no legal foundation and CIT(A) rightly allowed the assessee’s appeal.
Revenue’s contention that appeal against earlier ITAT order was pending before High Court was rejected, as mere pendency does not revive an order already set aside. Accordingly, Revenue’s appeal was dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the impugned order dated 25/09/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2012–13, which in turn arose from the order dated 29/03/2022 passed under section 147 read with section 263 read with section 144B of the Act.
