The assessment order was passed without following the mandatory provision of section 144C of the Act. PCIT passed the revision order setting aside the assessment order. On appeal the Tribunal held that since the mandatory provision of the section 144C of the Act was not complied with, the assessment order itself becomes a nullity in the eyes of law and is non-est. The Tribunal held that when the foundation itself for the assumption of revisionary jurisdiction does not exist, PCIT could not have exercised his revisionary jurisdiction in respect of null and void assessment order. Order of revision was quashed. Followed Mohan Jute Bags Mfg. Co. v. PCIT (ITA No. 416/ Kol/2020 AY. 2014-15) (dt. 17-11-2021 (AY. 2014-15).
Manorama Devi Jaiswal v. ITO (2021) BCAJ-December-P. 46 (Kol.) (Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Reference to dispute resolution panel-Order passed without complying the mandatory procedure prescribed u/s.144C is non-est-Order which is a nullity and non-est cannot be a revised. [S. 144C, Art. 14, 21]