Income Tax

Legal expenses claim of Salman Khan allowed in set aside proceedings by revisionary order of CIT u/s 263.

Legal expenses claim of Salman Khan allowed in set aside proceedings by order of Commissioner of Income Tax under Revision u/s 263

The Hindustan Times in 2015, quoting Salim Khan, father of Salman Khan had reported that Bollywood actor had spent more than Rs 25 crore in the 2002 hit-and-run case. It appears that Income Tax Department was also concerned about the legal and professional expenses claimed by Salman Khan as the Commissioner of Income Tax ordered Revision of income tax assessment orders for three years under section 263.

It is notable that under section 263 of the Income tax Act, 1961, the Commissioner of Income tax may examine the record of any proceedings and if he finds that the order passed is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, he may after giving an opportunity of being heard, cancel an assessment made and direct fresh assessment.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 1132 (2017) (02) ITAT

Brief Facts of the Case:
The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai had passed the revision orders under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) directing the Assessing Officer to examine the issue relating to legal & professional expenses incurred by the assessee during the AY 2011-12 to 2013-14.

The assessee, had challenged those orders before ITAT.

However, before ITAT it was submitted that pending the appeal, the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the revision orders, had examined the issue in the set aside proceedings and he has allowed the claim of the assessee with respect to expenditure claimed on account of legal & professional expenses.

It was submitted to the ITAT that the in view of the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer giving effect to the revision orders, present appeals had become infructuous.

Observations made by the Tribunal:
The ITAT noticed that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting these appeals since he was not having any grievance in the assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer giving effect to the revision order. The Departmental Representative did not object the factual aspects.

Held:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee.
 

Download Full Judgment

Related Article : Salman Khan must not be punished for being Salman Khan Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • SEBI

Modified Norms for Nomination in Demat Accounts and Mutual Fund Folio

Modified Norms for Nomination in Demat Accounts and Mutual Fund Folio SEBI has modified Norms on Nomination to be implemented…

2 days ago
  • Companies Act

CSR implementation through zero coupon zero principal instruments

Corporate Social Responsibility implementation through zero coupon zero principal instruments Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has authorised Corporate Social Responsibility…

2 days ago
  • bar-council

Bar Council of India notifies the directions for the election disputes in 2026 State Bar Council election

Bar Council of India notifies the directions for the election disputes in 2026 State Bar Council election Pursuant to the…

4 days ago
  • Empanelment

IOB Concurrent Audit Empanelment for the Financial Year 2026-27 Last Date: 10.06.2026

Indian Overseas Bank Concurrent Audit Empanelment for the financial year 2026-27 (from 01.07.2026 to 30.06.2027)   Indian Overseas Bank has…

4 days ago
  • bankruptcy

Once CoC decides to reject Resolution Plan and liquidate CD for SRA’s default, no interference can be made

Once Committee of Creditors in its commercial wisdom, decides to reject the Resolution Plan and liquidate the Corporate Debtor on…

4 days ago
  • bankruptcy

Applicability of moratorium under IBC on proceedings u/s 138 of NI Act

Supreme Court refers the question of applicability of moratorium under IBC on proceedings u/s 138 of the NI Act to…

4 days ago