| COURT: | Supreme Court |
| CORAM: | A.K. Sikri J., Ashok Bhushan J |
| SECTION(S): | 263, 68 |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | bogus share capital, Revision, unexplained cash credit |
| COUNSEL: | Huzefa Ahmedi, Subash Agarwal |
| DATE: | November 29, 2017 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | December 5, 2017 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | - |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| S. 68 Bogus share capital: Law laid down in Subhlakshmi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT 155 ITD 171 (Kol), Rajmandir Estates 386 ITR 162 (Cal) etc that the CIT is entitled to revise the assessment order u/s 263 on the ground that the AO did not make any proper inquiry while accepting the explanation of the assessee insofar as receipt of share application money is concerned cannot be interfered with | |
The Commissioner of Income Tax had passed an order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with the observations that the Assessing Officer did not make any proper inquiry while making the assessment and accepting the explanation of the assessee(s) insofar as receipt of share application money is concerned. On that basis the Commissioner of Income Tax had, after setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer, simply directed the Assessing Officer to carry thorough and detailed inquiry. It is this order which is upheld by the High Court. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court
Recent Comments