Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Income Tax - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights October 2024 Year 2024 This

The assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. ...


Tax Review: PCIT's Section 263 Invocation Overruled; Assessment Order Found Accurate, Favoring Taxpayer's Land Purchase.

October 10, 2024

Case Laws     Income Tax     AT

The assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. The PCIT observed that the assessee, along with two co-owners, had purchased an immovable property (land), each having an equal one-third share. It was held that Section 142(1) cannot extend the scope of a defective notice u/s 143(2) without PCIT's approval, which was not obtained. The notice u/s 142(1) mentioned the transfer of property, not its purchase. The assessee provided details regarding large cash deposits and property transfer during the assessment proceedings. The PCIT cannot invoke Section 263 when the assessee has provided detailed replies to the issues raised by the AO u/ss 143(2) and 142(1). The AO passed the assessment order after considering all relevant details, which cannot be deemed erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. The PCIT's stance on the valuation of the immovable property based on stamp duty value cannot be the sole criterion for deeming the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interests. Consequently, the PCIT's order invoking Section 263 was held unjustified, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. Petition challenging validity of reopening assessment u/s 148 dismissed. No final order passed, jurisdictional issue raised for first time in review petition. Statutory...

  2. Review petition - Levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Tribunal sustaining the levy without providing an opportunity of hearing - Review applicant had paid entire tax amount...

  3. Tribunal held that an order passed following binding precedents cannot be recalled or reviewed based on a subsequent contrary judgment of a higher court. Once an order...

  4. Rejection of declaration for Tax Relief under the provisions of Sabka Vikas [Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - mistake apparent on record or sufficient reasons...

  5. Condonation of delay in filing of Review Application - In view of the fact that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to the Court / Tribunal whether the...

  6. In the matter under review, the High Court dismissed the review petitions filed by the parties. The Court held that no grounds were established for seeking a review of...

  7. Prosecution Proceedings initiated u/s 276C - Bogus LTCG - guilty mind i.e., mens rea - willful evasion of tax on claims made under the head LTCG/Short Term Capital Loss...

  8. Seeking review - error apparent on the face of record or not - The High Court held that, these documents were not part of the pleadings. Review does not mean rehearing...

  9. Authority to undertake a review contemplated under Section 67(5) of Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax, 2005 - since the regular Chairman of the Tribunal is not functioning,...

  10. Goods under dispute were sawn New Zealand pine logs classified under CTH 4403 by the importer, while the department sought to reclassify them under CTH 4407. The key...

  11. Priority of the charge - statutory charge in favour of the Sales Tax Department - if any Central Statute creates priority of a charge in favour of a secured creditor,...

  12. Legality of revision of order of Tribunal u/s 254 on ground of retrospective overruling - Judicial decision acts retrospectively. Judges do not make law they only...

  13. Doctrine of constitutional priority - Supremecy of attachment passed by the Tax Recovery Officer / Income Tax Department or to the mortgage created in favour of the...

  14. The review petition challenges the order imposing interest liability over the withheld amount and cost on the Managing Director. The court held that reviewing an order...

  15. A review application is maintainable on (i) discovery of new and important evidence which could not be produced earlier despite due diligence, (ii) mistake or error...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates