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]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share capital-Share premium-Order of High Court quashing the revision order-Delay of 358 days-SLP of revenue was dismissed failure to explain the condonation of delay. [S. 131, 142(1), Art. 136]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Business expenditure-Loss-Carry forward-Non application of mind-High Court holding Assessing Officer without enquiry or application of mind allowed assessee to carry forward loss and Commissioner right in revising-SLP of revenue was dismissed.[Art. 136]
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Non speaking order-Deduction of tax at source-Payment to non-resident-Application for certificate of nil deduction Royalty-Matter remanded to the CIT(A)-DTAA-India-USA. [S. 9(1)(vi), Expln. 6, 195(2),254(1), Art. 12(3)2.]
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Method of accounting-Bonded warehouses-Accrual basis-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer on concession by assessee-Appeal dismissed. [S. 254(1)]
S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Method of accounting-Bonded warehouses-Accrual basis-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer on concession by assessee-Appeal dismissed by high Court-If the assessee believed that its counsel wrongly conceded before the High Court on a point of law, it was expected of it to immediately prefer an appropriate application before the High Court and get the matter clarified. It was too late in the day to level such allegations-SLP rejected. [S. 254(1), Art. 136]