S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Educational Institution –Revision order is set aside. [S. 10(23C)(iiiad) 12A, 12AA, 143(3)]
Shri Venkateshwara Educational Institute v. CIT (E) (2023) 102 ITR 45 (SN) /200 ITD 193 (Kol) (Trib.)
Digest of case laws
Online digest of latest case laws
This Digest of case laws is prepared by KSA Legal and AIFTP from judgements reported in BCAJ, CTR, DTR, ITD, ITR, ITR (Trib), Chamber's Journal, SOT, Taxman, TTJ, BCAJ, ACAJ, www.itatonline.org and other journals
Click here to download the pdf versions of the Digest of case laws 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)]
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-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]
Satya Narayan Dhoot v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 13 (SN) / 221 TTJ 750(Jodhpur) (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)]
Reckitt Benchkiser Healthcare India Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 35 (SN)(Ahd) (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]
Good Earth Fertilizers Co. P. Ltd. v. ITO (2023)102 ITR 68 (SN)(Chennai) (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]
G. T. Homes v. PCIT (2023)102 ITR 11 (SN)(Raipur) (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)]
Control Print Ltd v. PCIT (2023) 102 ITR 5 (SN)(Mum)(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)]
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. 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)]
Spicejet Ltd. v. Add. CIT (2023)102 ITR 58 (Delhi)(Trib)S. 194A : Deduction at source-Interest other than interest on securities-S. 194A : Deduction at source-Interest other than interest on securities-Non deduction of TDS on year-end provision-Suo moto disallowance of expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia)-liability to deduct tax at source u/s 194A exists-levy of interest u/s 201(1A) –Failure to identify the payees-Matter remanded.[S.40(a)(i), 40(a)(ia),191, 201 (1), 201(IA)]
Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 102 ITR 485 (Bang)(Trib)