S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Bogus sales-Issue is not considered and decided by the CIT(A)-Revision is valid [S. 250]
Om Industries v. PCIT (2022) 217 DTR 230/ 99 ITR 422 (Jaipur)(Trib) JR Industries v. PCIT 2022) 217 DTR 230/ 99 ITR 422 (Jaipur)(Trib) Vikas Oil Products v. PCIT 2022) 217 DTR 230 / 99 ITR 422 (Jaipur)(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-Non consideration of reply to show cause notice-Twin Condition of error in the order and said order which can be said prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, have not been met-Revision order was quashed. [S. 143(3)]
Rajinder Chauhan v. PCIT (2022) 219 TTJ 1017 / 98 ITR 610 (Chd)(Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Lack of proper enquiry-Two sets of finding by PCIT self-contradictory-Revision is held to be valid.
Rajat Gupta (HUF) v. PCIT (2022) 220 TTJ 447 (Chd)(Trib) Sunita Gupta v. PCIT (2022) 220 TTJ 447 (Chd)(Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Lack of enquiry-Acceptance in subsequent year cannot hold water as assessment order of year under consideration is to tested on the parameter of ingredients of s. 263-Order u/s. 263 upheld [S. 142(1), 143(3)]
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Invalid re-assessment or void assessment proceedings-Long term capital gain-Order of revision is bad in law [S. 45, 143(3), 147, 148]
Pradeep Dattatraya Banginwar v. PCIT (2022) 213 DTR 89 / 217 TTJ 246(Nag)(Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Loss on sale of shares-capital loss or speculation loss-Revision justified-Block of assets-Depreciation-Project kept ready to use-Revision is not justified. [S. 32, 43(5)]
Nikul J. Patel v. CIT (2022) 95 ITR 50 (SN)(Ahd) (Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Carry forward of long term capital loss-Exempt income-Revision order was quashed. [S. 10(38), 74 (1)(b), 74(1)(c)]
Pankaj Kishorchandra Desai v. PCIT(2022) 95 ITR 76 (SN)(Surat)(Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Buyback transactions-Deemed dividend-Reduction of share capital-Non application of mind-DTAA-India-Singapore-Revision order is up held. [S. 2(22) (d), 45, 92CA(3), 115O, 144C, 160, 163]
Madura Coats P. Ltd v. PCIT (2022) 95 ITR 70(SN) (Chennai)(Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Agricultural land-Assessing Officer accepting valuation report furnished by assessee-Failure to follow mandatory provisions of law-Revision is justified. [S. 50C, 56(2)(vii) (b)]
Minakshi Shivkumar Bansal (Mrs.) v. PCIT (2022)95 ITR 11 (SN) (Pune) (Trib)S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Mismatch of disclosure of receipts-Income-Tax Return and Form 26AS-Assessee duly filing reply with necessary evidence-Assessing Officer sending proposal to Principal Commissioner on same issue-Amounts to miscarriage of justice-Revision order was quashed. [S. 154, Form, 26AS.]
Gurfateh Films and Sippy Grewal Productions (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2022)95 ITR 456 (Amritsar)(Trib)