Home › Archive for Income-Tax Act › Page 173
Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Surya Hatchery (Earlier Known as M/S Neelkanth Breeding Farm) v. PCIT (2023) 102 ITR 186/ 221 TTJ 567 (Chd) (Trib) Neelkant Hatcheries v.PCIT (2023) 102 ITR 186/ 221 TTJ 567 (Chd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Survey-Additional income-Revision order is set aside.[S.143(3)]

Shri Venkateshwara Educational Institute v. CIT (E) (2023) 102 ITR 45 (SN) /200 ITD 193 (Kol) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Educational Institution –Revision order is set aside. [S. 10(23C)(iiiad) 12A, 12AA, 143(3)]

Harish Jain v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 84 / 221 TTJ 276 (Jaipur)(Trib) Ram Kishan Verma v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 84 /221 TTJ 276(Jaipur)(Trib) Manoj Kumar Sharma v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 84 /221 TTJ 276 (Jaipur)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Search and seizure-Penalty-Not recording satisfaction-Concealment penalty-Principal Commissioner cannot exercise revisional jurisdiction qua proceedings before an Appellate Authority-Revision is invalid.[S. 132,153A, 271(1)(c)]

Satya Narayan Dhoot v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 13 (SN) / 221 TTJ 750(Jodhpur) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Industrial undertaking-Losses incurred prior to initial year-Deduction allowed by Assessing Officer in accordance with circular-Without setting off brought forward unabsorbed depreciation-Capital gains-Securities Transaction Tax-Own funds-Revision is quashed. [S.10(38), 80IA]

Reckitt Benchkiser Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 35 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Assessing Officer disallowed the expenses after considering the reply of the assessee –Extent of inquiry Assessing Officer’s prerogative-Commissioner cannot impose his own understanding of extent of inquiry-Revision is not valid. [S.40(a)(i) 40(ia) 143(3)]

Good Earth Fertilizers Co. P. Ltd. v. ITO (2023)102 ITR 68 (SN)(Chennai) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny assessment-Issues raised in revision thoroughly examined in assessment proceedings-Revision is bad in law.[S.14A, 36(1)(iii), R.8D]

G. T. Homes v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 11 (SN)(Raipur) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Record-Unexplained expenditure-Repayment of unsecured loans-Shell Companies-Revision is not justified-Loans from shell companies-Revision is justified.[S.68, 69C]

Control Print Ltd v. PCIT (2023) 102 ITR 5 (SN)(Mum)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Industrial undertaking-Himachal Pradesh-Audit report filed physically before filing of return-Deposit of cash-Demonetisation period-Detailed filed in the course of assessment proceedings-Revision is held to be not valid.[S.80IA(7), 80IC, 80IE (6), 143(3)]

Kashmiri Lal Gupta v.PCIT (2023)102 ITR 1 / 224 TTJ 370(Chd)(Trib) Gupta Electrico v.PCIT (2023)102 ITR 1/ 224 TTJ 370 (Chd)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Survey-Surrender of income-Commissioner cannot look again at same information-Revision is quashed.[S.133A, 143(3)]

Spicejet Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2023)102 ITR 58 (Delhi)(Trib)

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Additional grounds-Lease expenditure-Revised computation-Not justified in refusing admission-Matter remanded to the CIT(A).[S. 37(1)]