{"id":54871,"date":"2025-06-11T12:53:55","date_gmt":"2025-06-11T07:23:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cit-ltu-v-canara-bank-2025-302-taxman-369-sc-editorial-cit-ltu-v-canara-bank-2021-277-taxman-215-karnhc\/"},"modified":"2025-06-11T12:53:55","modified_gmt":"2025-06-11T07:23:55","slug":"cit-ltu-v-canara-bank-2025-302-taxman-369-sc-editorial-cit-ltu-v-canara-bank-2021-277-taxman-215-karnhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/cit-ltu-v-canara-bank-2025-302-taxman-369-sc-editorial-cit-ltu-v-canara-bank-2021-277-taxman-215-karnhc\/","title":{"rendered":"CIT, LTU v. Canara Bank (2025) 302 Taxman 369 (SC) Editorial : CIT, LTU v. Canara Bank (2021) 277 Taxman 215 (Karn)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Commissioner passed the Revision order. On\u00a0 appeal, Tribunal placing reliance on its decision passed in earlier years, set aside order passed by Commissioner.\u00a0 On appeal\u00a0 Revenue contended that decision of Tribunal in earlier year was set aside by High Court in appeal and hence, revision order was just.\u00a0 High Court\u00a0 held that merely because order of Assessing Officer was passed relying upon order of Tribunal which was subsequently reversed by High Court could not justify order passed by Commissioner under section 263\u00a0 of the Act. SLP\u00a0 of the Revenue is dismissed. (AY. 2009-10)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Depreciation-Order passed by Assessing Officer relying on the decision of Tribunal-Subsequently set aside  by High Court-Revision is not valid-Order of High Court is affirmed. [S. 32, 143(3), Art. 136] <\/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-54871","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-eh1","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54871","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=54871"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54871\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":54872,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54871\/revisions\/54872"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=54871"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=54871"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=54871"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}