The case pertains to the validity of revision u/s 263 involving ...

Supreme Court dismisses petition on financial discrepancies; Tribunal orders further substantiation by assessee.

October 28, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax SC

The case pertains to the validity of revision u/s 263 involving a substantial question of law or fact. There were discrepancies between the figures for current assets and current liabilities in the balance sheet and cash flow statement filed before the Assessing Officer for the financial year 2007-08. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, and the Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A)'s file to allow the assessee an opportunity to substantiate its case. However, the Tribunal remarked that the assessee was not interested in reconciling the discrepancies but attempting to use technical reasons to avoid responsibility, showcasing the triviality of the matter. The Supreme Court held that no case for interference was made out under Article 136 of the Constitution and dismissed the Special Leave Petition, condoning the delay. Any pending application was also disposed of.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case pertains to the validity of revision u/s 263 involving ...

Supreme Court dismisses petition on financial discrepancies; Tribunal orders further substantiation by assessee.

October 28, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax SC

You may also like:

Gross violation of CBEC instructions and the precedential value of CESTAT decisions. The Revenue filed an appeal before the first Appellate Authority without specifying...

HC quashed Tribunal's order regarding reopening of assessment based on alleged non-disclosure of unabsorbed investment allowance. The Tribunal erroneously concluded that...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - An order in the name of dead person - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged that the penalty order was indeed issued in the name of a deceased...

Doctrine of merger applied to impugned order of Appellate Tribunal imposing penalty on appellant. Held that since Supreme Court's judgment on appeal against Tribunal's...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed the validity of a revision u/s 263, focusing on the alleged non-consideration of the assessee's submissions by the Principal...

Addition u/s. 69A - unexplained cash deposits in the bank account - The Tribunal found the explanation provided by the assessee regarding the sale consideration for real...

Revision u/s 263 - The Tribunal concluded that the assessing officer had conducted a reasonable inquiry into the relevant issues, and the assessment order was neither...

The HC held that the Commissioner's order under Section 263 of the IT Act constituted an open remand, not a closed remand, as it set aside the assessment order and...

The High Court held that the order u/s 263 made no reference to the issue of depreciation, and the Tribunal had correctly answered the question by stating that the...

Validity of assessment order - Discrepancy Nos. 1, 2, 10, and 11: The discrepancies include issues such as non-GST supplies, alleged mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1...

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. The Assessee did not disclose non-eligibility...

The assessing officer (AO) is empowered u/s 275(1A) to revise the penalty order by giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee within six months from the...

Non-speaking order - It is clear that the order of Tribunal is certainly a non-speaking order and the Tribunal failed to consider the grounds raised by the appellant....

Assessee failed to justify receipt discrepancy between ITR and Form 26AS, AO made addition considering it as fees for technical services and imposed penalty u/s 270A for...

The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving a revision u/s 263 due to discrepancies in the assessment order, including undisclosed TDS, differences in purchases...

Quick Updates: