Case Law Details
PCIT Vs Anindita Steels Ltd. (Calcutta High Court)
In the case at hand the Tribunal rightly pointed out that the ground on which notice under Section 263 of the Act was issued was identical to the reason for reopening the assessment earlier. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that no independent enquiry was conducted by the PCIT to justify assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. It is settled legal principle that the PCIT cannot substitute its opinion to that of the assessing officer on the same material which was noted by the assessing officer in the reassessment proceeding.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
The Court : We have heard Mr. Asok Bhowmik, learned standing counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Mazumder, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee.
There is a delay of 299 days in filing this appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons given in the affidavit filed in support of the condonation of delay petition. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the petition for condonation of delay is allowed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
