Income Tax : Understanding the exclusion of time limits during Court stays in assessment proceedings under Finance Bill 2025 for Income Tax ass...
Income Tax : Explore Section 263 of ITA, 1961, and its implications for revising assessment orders with no discussion on certain issues. Judici...
Income Tax : Explore landmark judgments on capital gain tax exemptions under Sections 54 and 54F of the Income Tax Act. Key highlights from ITA...
Income Tax : Understand the differences between appellate powers u/s 251, revisional powers u/s 263, and 264 of the Income Tax Act, and how the...
Income Tax : Explore the necessity of issuing notices under Section 263 post the Faceless Assessment Scheme introduction. Analyze the schemes e...
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 : Delhi ITAT rules Section 56(2)(viib) of the IT Act does not apply to transactions between holding and subsidiary companies, quashi...
Income Tax : Rajasthan High Court held that profits and gains generated by captive consumption of electricity is eligible for deduction under s...
Income Tax : M/s. GRR Holdings is a firm was incorporated on 31.01.2014 with two partners Shri Gaddam Shyam Prasad Reddy & Shri Syed Fayaz Moha...
Income Tax : Calcutta HC dismisses IT appeal against Subhlabh Steels due to ongoing insolvency under IBC, citing SC ruling in Monnet Ispat. Rea...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that reopening of an assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act merely on the basis of communication...
Infinity Infotech Parks Limited vs. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) Revision u/s 263 is duly authorized where there is a mistake apparent from the records which itself proves that the order passed on this issue by the Assessing Officer was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
ITAT Ahmadabad held In the case of Adani Port & Special Economic Zone Ltd. vs. ACIT that two circumstances must exist to enable the Commissioner to exercise power of revision u/s 263, namely (i) the order is erroneous
Bombay High court held In the case of M/s Vijay Udhyog vs. CIT that where two opinion or views are available and one of the view is taken by the AO, cannot be a basis for revision of order u/s 263. Also none of the clauses of section 80I(2)(i) to (iv) prohibit the assessee from taking other industrial undertakings on hire and use it for the purpose of manufacturing activity.
ITAT Delhi held in Ambience Hotel & Resort Pvt. Vs CIT that if the AO had done his assessment ignoring the provisions of the IT act and TPA and ignoring the examinations/inquiry then that assessment was erroneous
High Court of Bombay at Goa held in the case of CIT vs. V. S. Dempo & Company Ltd. Held that view taken by the Assessing Officer or by the Commissioner has to be on the basis of the law prevailing on the day the view was taken.
In these cases there are 18 different assessees who filed appeal before ITAT aggrieved from the order u/s 263 passed by CITs. In original proceedings AO passed orders with nominal additions after investigation by way of summoning various subscribers to share capital of assessee companies.
ITAT Mumbai has in the case of M/s Shoreline Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v CIT held that CIT was justified in invocation of Section 263 when AO has not made any inquiry with regard to the expenses claimed in respect of accommodation bill obtained by assessee that reduced profit of assessee by 100% instead of 15% considered by AO.
The condition precedent for exercising the revisional power under section 263 of the Act is that the order under revision should not only be erroneous, but such erroneous order should result in prejudice to the interests of the Revenue.
Issue before tribunal: Whether CIT can assume jurisdiction u/s 263 on the facts and circumstances of the case. Whether order of the AO was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue.
ITAT Kolkatta has held In the case of Menally Sayaji Engineering Ltd. VS -CIT that if assessee failed to deduct TDS during the previous year on payments of management service fee and royalty debited to the profit and loss account and if in his Assessment Order Passed U/s. 143(3)
