Income Tax : The Tribunal held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income under Section 251 on matters not considered by the Assessing Officer during as...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be exercised when the Assessing Officer has already examined the iss...
Income Tax : ITAT quashed PCIT’s Section 263 order, holding AO’s treatment of survey income as business income valid and not erroneous or p...
Income Tax : Ahmedabad ITAT quashes reassessments based on ACB report, ruling the AO lacked independent "reason to believe" and only used borro...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune upholds PCIT's order u/s 263, setting aside an assessment for failure to verify ₹82.64 crore in advances for property...
Income Tax : National Chamber of Industries & Commerce, U.P has made a representation against Indiscriminate notices by the Income Tax Depa...
Income Tax : KSCAA has made a Representation on Challenges in Income Tax Related to Rectification Proceedings, Order Giving Effect, Delay in P...
Income Tax : One of the key sources of dispute is the existing arrangement for follow up on audit objections by Internal Audit Party and the Re...
Income Tax : The ITAT Amritsar held that a valuation report by itself cannot justify addition under Section 69 without evidence of extra paymen...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that amortization of BOT road project expenditure must be computed based on the actual concession period and not ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that the reassessment order could not be revised under Section 263 since the conditions for treating jewellery e...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that assessment orders passed pursuant to earlier remand directions were barred by limitation under Section 15...
Income Tax : Delhi ITAT held that an Assessing Officer cannot make additions beyond the specific issues remanded by the Principal Commissioner ...
AO had applied his mind while doing the assessment therefore, the investigation by AO could not be called ‘lack of investigation’ and revision order passed under section 263 was quashed.
ITAT Delhi held that revision of assessment order unjustifiable as the assessment order cannot be considered to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
Delhi High Court held that for exercise jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, twin conditions i.e. order being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue needs to be satisfied. PCIT order not satisfying the same needs to be quashed.
ITAT Chennai held that as cash deposited by assessee received from petty shop owners on account of sale of its product during demonetization period was not examined by AO during assessment. Accordingly, PCIT rightly passed revision order u/s 263 directing AO to carry out necessary verification.
Orissa High Court held that while exercising suo motu revisional power u/s. 263 of the Act, the CIT cannot travel beyond the scope of the issues which form part of the ‘limited scrutiny’ in the original Assessment Order.
ITAT Mumbai held that as entire reasons for reopening were recorded by incorrect assumption of facts, accordingly, reopening was invalid and bad-in-law. Hence, subsequent invocation of revisional jurisdictional under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is untenable in law.
Orissa High Court held that when original re-assessment order was not passed validly, subsequent revisional order passed by PCIT is held to be invalid.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that compensation received from proposed building by way of allotment is extinguishment of right in relation to capital asset and hence provisions of section 45 of the Income Tax Act gets applicable.
Delhi High Court held that recourse to provisions of section 263 of the Income Tax Act sustained as prima facie view concludes that AO has committed an error in law.
PCIT has tried to super impose his view in exercise of powers u/s. 263 of Income Tax Act over one of possible view taken by Assessing Officer.
