9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. [ 2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] and allowed assessee appeal - HELD THAT:- Tribunal has noted that the assessing officer had made an addition of 2% to the gross profit over and above the rate of gross profit of 4.63% totalling to 7.63%. It appears that after completing the assessment the assessing officer addressed the PCIT stating that certain error has occurred in the assessment order and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purchase shown by the assessee and the sales decline. Thus, on facts, the tribunal concluded that assumption of jurisdiction by the PCIT under section 263 of the Act was erroneous. There is no error in the order passed by the tribunal nor there is any perversity in its approach for us to interfere. Revenue Appeals are dismissed. - THE HON'BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON'BLE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iction exercised u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not in tune with the facts and evidences on record. ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on law the Learned ITAT erred in holding that the Assessing Officer had taken one possible view out of two views, where only one view is possible as per section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. We have heard the learned s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... requested him to review the order under section 263 of the Act. Whether such a procedure adopted by the PCIT was legally sustainable was examined by the tribunal and in our considered view after taking note of the various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court it was rightly pointed out that section 263 of the Act does not permit substituting one opinion for another. That apart, the tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
