9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 769X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the order under Section 263 passed by the CIT? The assessment year is 1986-87. 2. In respect of the assessment proceedings for the above assessment year, the assessee declared the cost of construction of a cinema theatre viz., 'Mahalakshmi Palace' at ₹ 10,53,000. The value declar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the IT Act available before the AO which show that the assessment as framed was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. 3. It was also contended that raising of the loan by the assessee from Jayalakshmi Leasing Company was not part of the proceedings under the IT Act and the same is extraneous to the assessment proceedings. Hence, the invocation of the power under Section 263 of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. 6. By the Finance Act, 1988, an Explanation was substituted w.e.f. 1st June, 1988, to Section 263 of the Act. The Explanation was further amended by the Finance Act, 1989, and the definition of the term record was explained. It has been provided in the Explanation that record shall include and shall deemed always to have included all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Court has considered the case which was of the year prior to the amendment. This position of law has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the assessee. If the above rulings of the apex Court and of this Court is applied to the facts of the present case, the order of the CIT cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. 8. In view of the binding decision of the Supreme Court as well a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
