Revision u/s 263 - The Pr. CIT has not pointed out as to what is ...

Tax Authority Fails to Identify Specific Errors by Assessing Officer; No Prejudice to Revenue's Interest Found.

July 6, 2021

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Revision u/s 263 - The Pr. CIT has not pointed out as to what is the error committed by the AO in accepting the replies from various parties. Without pointing out any defects, it cannot be said that there is an error which caused prejudice to the interest of the Revenue. This is not a case of lack of enquiry or non-application of mind. The AO has made an enquiry and has taken a plausible view on the issues. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Revision u/s 263 - The Pr. CIT has not pointed out as to what is ...

Tax Authority Fails to Identify Specific Errors by Assessing Officer; No Prejudice to Revenue's Interest Found.

July 6, 2021

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

CIT failed to discharge his statutory duty and instead of taking a clear call and demonstrating errors made by assessing officer and prejudice caused to the revenue, the...

The High Court held that the appellate authority erred in enhancing the tax liability payable by the appellant/assessee in an appeal filed by the assessee without...

The High Court examined the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the prescribed income-tax authority to issue notices u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. It held...

Revision u/s 263 - PCIT has used only probability and likelihood to find the error in the assessment order which is not permitted, he ought to find out specific error in...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Assessing Officer to usurp the jurisdiction to reopen the assessment - The first Assessing Officer has made the reassessment after...

Impugned order set aside, matter remitted back to Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. Assessing Officer rejected claim based on Tax Audit Report not being duly...

Limitation for passing a assessment order - Consequential order passed by the assessing authority beyond the time limit specified u/s 153 (2A) - The High Court examined...

Revision u/s 263 - The tribunal held that, when the ld. PCIT himself was satisfied that there was no error in the order of the Assessing Officer vis-à-vis irregularities...

The Court rejected the petitioner's challenge to the show cause notice (SCN) issued u/s 74 of the CGST Act on jurisdictional grounds. The petitioner failed to submit a...

The High Court held that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) is not permitted to issue a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, as it would violate the provisions...

Penalty levied u/s 271(1)(b) - assessee had failed to provide full submissions - penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(b) of the IT Act deserves to be...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - The Appellate Tribunal observed that the appellant, during reassessment proceedings, had filed their return of income but failed to provide...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that when the valuation officer fails to submit the valuation report within a reasonable time, the assessing officer cannot...

Section 142(1) notice issued by non-jurisdictional officer held valid. Plain reading of Section 143(2) indicates either Assessing Officer or prescribed income-tax...

The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal regarding the revision u/s 263 concerning unsecured loans received. The Principal Commissioner found that the...

Quick Updates: