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-Explanation was submitted on various issues during the course of assessment proceedings-Revision order was quashed.
Shree Maruti Nandan Guwar Gum (P) Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 213 TTJ 65 (UO) (Jodhpur)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Additional income disclosed in the course of survey-Land development expenses-Revision order is held to be not valid. [S. 133A]
Rudra Developers v. PCIT (2021) 213 TTJ 715 (Surat)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Sources of cash deposits-Verified in the proceedings u/s. 147-Revision was set aside. [S. 68, 147]
Mahabir Prasad Ajirma v. PCIT (2021) 213 TTJ 610 / 206 DTR 361 (Raipur)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Payment to doctors-Consultation fees-No evidence brought on record to show that the payment was freebies-Expenses on exempt income-Submission was accepted by the Assessing Officer in the course of assessment proceedings-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 14A, 37(1)]
SRL Diagnosties Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 214 TTJ 929 (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Trading loss-Rental income-Income from house property-Income from other sources-Specific query was raised during assessment proceedings-Revision was held to be not valid. [S. 22, 24, 28((i), 56]
Shree Balkrishna Commercial Co. Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 214 TTJ 1057 / 63 CCH 515 / 208 DTR 425 (Delhi)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Exemption on sale and purchase of agricultural lands-Revision was held to be not valid-Lack of opportunity-Fresh opportunity of passing the order after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing cannot be given-Order was quashed. [S. 2(14)(iii), 54B]
Ramdev Mandhani (HUF) v. ITO (2021) 214 TTJ 1024 / 208 DTR 438 (Raipur)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Nature and source of deposits examined during assessment proceedings-Order cannot be held as erroneous-Order is set aside [S. 143 (3)]
Ram Bharos Shashi v. ITO (2021) 214 TTJ 9 (UR) / 63 CCH 373 (Jodhpur)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Valuation of flats purchased on the basis of registered valuer-Failure to refer to District valuation Officer-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 55A, 56(2)(vii)(b), 143 (3)]
Monoj Kumar Biswas v. PCIT (2021) 214 TTJ 340 / 63 CCH 380 / 207 DTR 145 (Kol.)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny-Opportunity of being heard-Violation of principle of natural justice-Order was quashed-The prayer of departmental representative to remand the case to the file of the PCIT was rejected. [S. 143(3)]
Dee Vee Projects Ltd. v. PCIT (2021) 214 TTJ 660 / 207 DTR 452 (Raipur)(Trib.)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Surrender of capital gains in revised return-Failure to levy penalty–Explanation 2 to section 263 was not referred-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 139(5), 143(3), 271(1)(c)]
Davinder Kaur Bains v. PCIT (2021) 214 TTJ 1159 / (2022) 209 DTR 47 (Asr.)(Trib.) Gurbachan Singh Bains v. PCIT (2021) 214 TTJ 1159 / (2022) 209 DTR 47 (Asr.)(Trib.)