Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that every loss of revenue cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and if the Assessing Officer has adopted one of the courses permissible under law or where two views are possible and the Assessing Officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order, unless the view taken by the Assessing Officer is unsustainable under law. Unless and until the order passed by the Tribunal suffers from any perversity or ignores any vital fact in an appeal under section 260A of the Act, the High Court cannot interfere with such an order. Order of Tribunal is affirmed. (AY. 2016-17)
PCIT v. Britannia Industries Ltd. (2023)453 ITR 576/ 330 CTR 435 (Cal)(HC) Editorial: Order in Britannia Industries Ltd v. PCIT (2023) 102 ITR 513 (Kol)(Trib), is affirmed.
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Commissioner holding view different from that of Assessing Officer on a particular issue -Revision is not justified- High Court cannot set aside finding of Appellate Tribunal unless finding is perverse.[S. 260A]