Tag: cit revision 263
FDRs Interest was business income but not contract income. Interest on Margin Money deposits for obtaining bank guarantee is not income out of contract business-ITAT upheld CIT order u/s 263 ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 951 2016 (06) ITAT Assessment Year – 2009-10 Date/Month of Judgment/Order: June 2016 Brief Facts …
Income cannot be estimated without rejection of books of account. ITAT quashed revision order passed u/s 263 enhancing net profit rate. ABCAUS Case Law Citation: 936 2016 (06) ITAT Brief Facts of the Case: The present appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 263 …
When the assessee claimed exemption on the principle of mutuality in the return of income and the AO also made detailed inquiries on the issue of principle of mutuality and passed the order u/s. 143(3), the revision u/s 263 was bad in Law-ITAT Delhi
In a recent judgment, ITAT Delhi has interpreted the objective and scope of invoking revisionary powers of Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as under: The provisions of section 263 cannot be invoked to correct each and every type of …
In a recent judgment, ITAT held that the word ‘erroneous’ in section 263 includes the failure to make an inquiry when circumstances would make such an enquiry prudent. Also order passed without applying the principles of natural justice or without application of mind are fall in the same category. …
Allowability of interest as cost of acquisition of capital asset u/s 48(ii) is highly debatable, not open for revision u/s 263 by CIT The issue relating to the allowability of interest as the part of cost of acquisition of the capital asset under section 48(ii) is highly debatable …
CIT Revision u/s 263 unjustified alleging wiping out income surrendered u/s 133A treating it business income and not separately u/s 69A INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR I.T.A No. 203(Asr)/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Superfine Agro Industries (Appellant) vs. Income Tax Officer (Respondent) Date of Order: 10/03/2016 ORDER PER T. …
Revision u/s 263 not justified in case of best judgment assessment u/s 144 for non co-operation by assessee INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR I.T.A No. 220(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s Sutlej Wine Enterprises (Appellant) vs. PrCIT (Respondent) Date of Order: 10/03/2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): …