9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1796X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er: The above titled appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, [(hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)], Ludhiana dated 21.03.2016 for assessment years 2007-08 and 2009-10 respectively. 2. Since identical issue has been involved in both the appeals, hence, the same were heard together and are being disposed off by this common order. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. However, the said assessment order was set aside by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (in short 'CIT') vide his order dated 23.3.2013 in exercise of his revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and he thereby directed the Assessing officer to make assessment afresh. The Assessing officer in compliance of the orders of the CIT passed a fresh assessment order dated 18.3.2014 and made certain ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 53D for obtaining approval of JCIT is not procedural only but a mandatory requirement. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, held that the assessment done by the Assessing officer was not valid and that the same was null and void. Being aggrieved by the above finding of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue has come in appeal before us. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and have also gone through the order of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set aside by the CIT for framing the same afresh. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the Assessing officer had lost jurisdiction to frame the assessment afresh in compliance of the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) passed u/s 263 of the Act. Rather the Assessing officer was bound to frame the assessment afresh until and unless the said order of the Commissioner has been stayed or set aside by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
