S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Property held for charitable purposes-Receipts from donors who deducted tax at source-No element of trade-Principle of consistency-No change in law or facts-Department cannot take different view without convincing reasons-Entitle to exemption-Rejection of revisional order was set aside. [S. 2(15) 11, 12,12A, 12AA, 13(8),80G, 194C, 194J, Art. 226]
S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Property held for charitable purposes-Receipts from donors who deducted tax at source-No element of trade-Principle of consistency-Entitle to exemption-Rejection of revisional order was set aside-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 2(15) 11, 12,12A, 12AA, 13(8),80G, 194C, 194J, Art. 136]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Assessing Officer issued questionnaire seeking comprehensive information regarding share capital transactions Assessee furnished required details and documents and adequate enquiries conducted by Assessing Officer-Power cannot be invoked without demonstrating failure of proper inquiry-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed. [S. 260A]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Tribunal’s quashing of revision order relying on High Court decision on similar issue-Not erroneous-No substantial question of law.[S. 260A]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Estimation of disallowance of purchase expenses-Assessing Officer accepting sale and purchase-Disallowing an estimated five per cent. of inflated amount-Revision order was quashed. [S. 37(1), 260A]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share capital and Share premium-Principal Commissioner invoking revision powers for second time on same issue involving share capital and share premium-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed.[S. 131, 254(1), 260A]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
book profits-Prior-period expenses-Hyper-technical Revision order directing addition of such amount in book profits, unsustainable-Order of Tribunal was set aside. [S. 115JA,260A]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Principal Commissioner had applied his mind and had not relied merely on Assessing Officer’s proposal-Order of revision valid-Order of Tribunal set aside. [S. 10(38), 143(3), 260A]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Assessing Officer issued questionnaire seeking comprehensive information regarding share capital transactions Assessee furnished required details and documents and adequate enquiries conducted by Assessing Officer-Power cannot be invoked without demonstrating failure of proper inquiry-SLP of revenue dismissed. [Art. 136]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Tribunal’s quashing of revision order relying on High Court decision on similar issue-SLP of revenue dismissed on the ground of delay and on the merits. [Art. 136]