Category: Income-Tax Act

Archive for the ‘Income-Tax Act’ Category


Sai Shirdi Constructions v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 22 (SN)(Mum) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from house property-Stock in trade-Amendment bringing notional annual value of property held as stock-in-trade to tax is prospective-Revision is not valid.[S.23(1)(a), 23(5), 24(a)]

Jaladurga Vss Sangha Tellaru v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 40 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Provisions made under various heads-Assessing Officer has not examined the details-Revision is valid-Benefit of Circular-Eligible deduction. [S.80P]

Hemang Chimanbhai Pokal v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 81 (SN) (Ahd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Reassessment order-Issue on which revision order was passed was neither subject matter of reassessment nor coming to notice during reassessment proceedings-Order is not erroneous. [S. 143(3), 147, 148]

Gujarat Infrastructure Co. v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 92(SN)(Surat) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Development expenses-Neither filed any written submission nor appeared before the Tribunal-Revision is justified.

Bimal Keshavlal Patel v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 19 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Purchase of property-Not pointing out error in order passed by Assessing Officer and how it was prejudicial to Revenue-Revision order was quashed.[S. 56(2)(vii)(b)]

Baidoddi Eshappa v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 78 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Demonetisation period-Cash deposits-Duty of the Assessing Officer to carry out investigation-Revision is proper. [S. 143(3), 263, Explanation 2]

Asian Star Co. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 56 (SN) (Mum)(Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Industrial undertaking-Generation of power-Windmill Assessing Officer applied his mind-Revision on the ground Assessing Officer did not examine whether separate books maintained-Not sustainable merely because Commissioner has different opinion-Revision is not valid. [S. 80IA(4)(iv), 80IA(7)]

Asha Devi v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 52 (SN)(Bang) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited Scrutiny for verification of cash deposits-Assessing Officer has not made proper verification-Revision is held to be justified. [S. 143(3)]

Trivitron Healthcare P. Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 98 ITR 105 / 2023) 225 TTJ 181/ 146 taxmann.com 130(Chennai) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Depreciation-Amalgamation of companies-Accounting Standard 14-Excess consideration paid over and above net asset value of amalgamating Company-Goodwill-Revision was quashed. [S. 32(1)]

Ravinder Bawa (Smt.) v. ITO (2022) 98 ITR 149 (Amritsar) (Trib)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Assessing Officer made complete enquiries-No adverse comments made by investigation department-Failure to bring evidence of cash deposited in account by Principal Commissioner-Proceedings without any merit-Revision order was quashed. [S. 147, 148]