Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Craftsman Automation Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 103 ITR 31 (SN)(Chennai)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Depreciation-Additional depreciation-Balance of additional depreciation w.r.t asset put to use in previous year can be claimed in the subsequent year-Revision order is quashed. [S. 32(1)(iia)]

Keshoraipatan Sahkari Sugar Mills Ltd., Kota v. PCIT (2023) 153 taxmann.com 290 / 104 ITR 566/ 223 TTJ 922 (Jaipur) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny-Co-operative societies-Deduction allowed by AO in limited scrutiny assessment to examine “Deduction under Chapter VI-A”.-Possible view-Revision is not valid. [S. 80P(2)(d)]

Vishal Aggarwal v. PCIT [(2023) 200 ITD 603 (Delhi) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cost of acquisition of asset-The amount paid to intermediary allottee from builder would form part of cost of acquisition-Revision is held to be not valid.[S. 45 ,48]

Othello Developers v. PCIT, [2023] 201 ITD 370/ 226 TTJ 103 (Ahd)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Stock in trade-Builder-Business income-Income from house property-Revision is held to be not valid .[S.22, 28(i)]

Agrani Buildestate v. PCIT [2023] 202 ITD 231 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Rental income-The Assessing officer has taken one plausible view based on exhaustive inquiries and detailed submissions unless the view adopted is not at all sustainable in law-Revision is held to be not valid .[S. 22, 28(i)]

Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. DCIT (E [2023] 201 ITD 274 (Ahd) (Trib.)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
High Court held that the assessee to be a society providing public utility services within the meaning of section 2(15) which was eventually affirmed by the Supreme Court-PCIT was wrong to hold Assessment Order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.-Revision order was quashed.[S. 2(15), 11, 12 13(8), 143(3)]

Reliable Educational Alliance Society v. CIT(E) (2023) 202 ITD 137/ 104 ITR 448 (Trib)(Delhi)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Corpus donation-Assessment completed after due verification / examination by AO of corpus donation including bank statements, balance sheet and confirmation of donation from donor which was also registered u/s. 12AA-Revision order was quashed.[S.12AA]

Impact Foundation (India) v. CIT, (E) (2023) 200 ITD 213 (Mum) (Trib))

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Property held for charitable purposes-Spending from accumulation of income of earlier year-The Assessing Officer had conducted necessary enquiries regarding utilization of income for purpose for which it was accumulated and had accepted same which was a plausible view, impugned revision order was untenable .[S. 11(3), 11 (5)]

Pralay Pradyotkanti Gosh v. Income-tax Officer (IT) [2023] 201 ITD 363 (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Salary income-Detailed enquiries into claim of assessee’s income being ‘exempt’ under the Act-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 5, 192]

Virudhunagar District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v.PCIT (2023) 201 ITD 573 (Chennai Trib)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Provision for doubtful debts-Revision bad in law where the A.O. has taken view possible in respect of standard asset where there was inherent risk of going these debts bad-Revision is upheld in cases where amount was receivable from Government in respect of debts waived off. [S. 36(1)(vii), 36(1)(via)(2)]