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)]
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-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)]
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-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]
Vishal Aggarwal v. PCIT [(2023) 200 ITD 603 (Delhi) (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)]
Othello Developers v. PCIT, [2023] 201 ITD 370/ 226 TTJ 103 (Ahd)(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)]
Agrani Buildestate v. PCIT [2023] 202 ITD 231 (Jaipur)(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)]
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]
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-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)]
Impact Foundation (India) v. CIT, (E) (2023) 200 ITD 213 (Mum) (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]
Pralay Pradyotkanti Gosh v. Income-tax Officer (IT) [2023] 201 ITD 363 (Ahd) (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)]