{"id":14236,"date":"2020-12-06T07:30:29","date_gmt":"2020-12-06T07:30:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/maithan-steel-and-power-ltd-v-pcit-202078-itr-532-kol-trib\/"},"modified":"2021-06-30T06:37:19","modified_gmt":"2021-06-30T01:07:19","slug":"maithan-steel-and-power-ltd-v-pcit-202078-itr-532-kol-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/maithan-steel-and-power-ltd-v-pcit-202078-itr-532-kol-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"Maithan Steel and Power Ltd. v. PCIT (2020)78 ITR 532 \/ 208 TTJ 334(Kol) (Trib)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Tribunal held that the insertion of Explanation 2 in section\u00a0263\u00a0by the Finance Act, 2015 with effect from June 1, 2015 does not ipso facto mean that every regular assessment could be revised even in cases where the action of the Assessing Officer satisfies the normal \u201cprudence\u201d test in scrutiny. The Principal Commissioner\u2019s revision directions qua the issue of section\u00a0115JB\u00a0minimum alternate tax computation of prior period income was not substantive. As regards excise duty\u00a0 Section\u00a043B\u00a0made it clear such a deduction of excise duty under sub-section (1) thereof is allowable only on actual payment irrespective of the previous year in which the liability to pay it as arose to the assessee according to the method of accounting regularly employed. The Revenue\u2019s stand questioning the liability of the assessee to excise duty whether for factual reverification or on legality, was rejected on this sole ground.( AY.2014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263 : Commissioner &#8211; Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Prior period income &#8211; Disclosure before Settlement Commission \u2014Neither erroneous nor causing prejudice to interests of  revenue \u2013 Revision is held to be not valid . [ S.43B 115JB  ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14236","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-3HC","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14236","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14236"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14236\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19767,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14236\/revisions\/19767"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14236"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14236"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14236"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}