{"id":27878,"date":"2022-06-26T22:55:25","date_gmt":"2022-06-26T17:25:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cargo-service-centre-india-p-ltd-v-dcit-2021-208-dtr-81-2022-192-itd-392-215-ttj-193-mum-trib\/"},"modified":"2022-06-26T22:55:25","modified_gmt":"2022-06-26T17:25:25","slug":"cargo-service-centre-india-p-ltd-v-dcit-2021-208-dtr-81-2022-192-itd-392-215-ttj-193-mum-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cargo-service-centre-india-p-ltd-v-dcit-2021-208-dtr-81-2022-192-itd-392-215-ttj-193-mum-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"Cargo Service Centre India (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2021) 208 DTR 81 \/ (2022) 192 ITD 392 \/ 215 TTJ 193 (Mum.)(Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee\u00a0 filed its return for relevant year with a loss of which was subjected to scrutiny assessment. The assessee moved a rectification application which was decided by Assessing Officer in assessee&#8217;s favour.\u00a0\u00a0 Commissioner revised rectification order under section 263 by holding that since Assessing Officer did not examine assessee&#8217;s claim for carry forward of loss in sufficient detail, loss could not be carried forward. Tribunal held that\u00a0 once a loss had been disclosed in income tax return, and such a loss had not been disturbed in scrutiny assessment proceedings, such a loss was to be treated as accepted, and quantification thereof could not have been disturbed. Revision of rectification order was\u00a0 quashed.\u00a0 (AY. 2012-13)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Loss returned was accepted in scrutiny assessment-Revision order of rectification is held to be not valid-Quantification cannot be disturbed in revision proceedings. [S. 72, 143(3), 154] <\/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-27878","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-7fE","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27878","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=27878"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27878\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":27879,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/27878\/revisions\/27879"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=27878"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=27878"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=27878"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}