Case Law Details
Vodafone India Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
It was argued by the ld. AR that the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [‘PCIT’] erred in assuming jurisdiction and initiating proceeding under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) since the order passed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) was neither ‘erroneous’ nor ‘prejudicial’ to the interest of the revenue as the AO had not only made adequate inquiries, but had also undertaken necessary verification on basis the of the details sought from the assessee during the course of the assessment proceedings and had taken one of the permissible views.
We also observe that the AO had conducted enquiries during the course of proceedings, however, the ld. CIT merely change of opinion by reappraising evidence is not within the parameters of revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 as laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Gabriel India Limited, 203 ITR 108. It is also well settled that where two views are possible and the AO has taken one of the possible views which might result in prejudice to the revenue, then also proceedings under section 263 of the Act cannot be initiated.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Pr.CIT8, Mumbai U/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) dated 28/03/2019 for the A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
