1 6.ITA.110-95 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPLICATION NO.110 OF 1995 The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Bombay. ..Applicant. Vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., Bombay. ..Respondent. .... Mr. Suresh Kumar, for the Applicant. Mr. B.V. Jhaveri, for the Respondent. .... CORAM : J. P. DEVADHAR & A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 14 th DECEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. Whether the ITAT was justified in canceling the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is the question raised in this application filed under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessment year involved herein is A.Y. 1981-82. 3. In the assessment year in question, the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 263 of the Income Tax Act was 2 6.ITA.110-95 set aside by the CIT(A) on the ground that the order passed by the CIT under Section 263 of the Act has been quashed and set aside by the ITAT. 4. It is not in dispute that the Reference Application filed by the Revenue against the order of ITAT setting aside the order of CIT under Section 263 of the Act has been rejected by the ITAT. There is nothing on record to show that the revenue has filed any application under Section 256(2) of the Act against the said order of the ITAT. 5. In these circumstances, if the order passed by the CIT under Section 263 of the Act stands cancelled, then the question of sustaining the assessment order passed in implementation of the order of CIT under Section 263 of the Act would not arise. Consequently the question of entertaining the application under Section 256(2) of the Act would not arise. 6. In this view of the matter, the Application is rejected. (A. R. JOSHI, J.) (J. P. DEVADHAR,J.)