##PAGE1##

2026:BHC-O S:19585-DB CNR No : HCBM020223132024 Prajakta Vartak IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L.) NO. 20200 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2229 OF 2026 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 2 Mumbai ...Appellant/Applicant Versus The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. ...Respondent _________

Ms. Samiksha Kanani for Appellant.

Mr. Madhur Agrawal i/b. Mr. Atul Jasani for Respondent.

__________

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &

DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

DATE: 28 AUGUST 2026 P.C.

1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order dated 08 September 2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bench at Mumbai (for short, “ITAT”) in Income Tax Appeal No. 1895/Mum/2023. The assessment year in question is A.Y. 2015-16.

2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has dismissed the Revenue’s appeal directed against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] dated 28 March, 2023, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent/assessee against the assessment order passed on 31 October 2021 by the NFAC, Delhi, under Section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act, was allowed. By the said order, the learned CIT (Appeals) held that, once the Tribunal had quashed the order passed under Section 263 of the Act, the consequential order passed by the learned Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Act dated 31 October 2021 would not survive. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the assessment order was annulled.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue submits that as the order dated 13 September 2021 passed by the ITAT, whereby the order dated 18 March 2020 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Act was quashed, is in fact the subject matter of challenge before this Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 938 of 2024. It is, therefore, her submission that, since the said order passed by the ITAT quashing the order under Section 263 of the Act is under challenge before this Court, the present appeal also needs to be admitted on the questions of law as urged for consideration in the present appeal and be tagged along with Income Tax Appeal No. 938 of 2024.

4. A request has been opposed on behalf of the respondent/assessee. Before we proceed to consider the rival contentions, we may observe that the following questions have been raised for consideration by the Revenue in the present appeal:-

“A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal has not erred in upholding the order under of the Ld. CIT(A), the FAA holding that the order holding that the order section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act dated 31.10.2021 does not survive, having been made without having any legally existed valid foundation, ignoring the fact that the revenue's appeal against the order of the Hon'ble Tribunal quashing the order u/s 263 is pending with Hon'ble Bombay High Court in ITXAL 39391/2022 ?

B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal has not erred in deciding the appeal ignoring the Revenue's appeal pending under section 260A without waiting for the final decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in ITXAL 39391/2022 ?

C. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Tribunal has not erred in not waiting for the decision in appeal in ITXAL 39391/2022 pending with the Hon'ble Bombay High Court to be adjudicated before deciding up the impugned appeal?

D. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of Hon'ble Tribunal does not deserve to be set aside, being contrary to law and judicial discipline?"

5. It is clear from a plain reading of the questions of law that the sole basis of the Revenue's contention