3I INFOTECH LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT- 15, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3705/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2023AY 2013-1415 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order under Section 263 was unsustainable. The AO had correctly referred the international transaction to the TPO, and the AO is bound by the TPO's determination. Prior to Finance Act 2022, TPO's orders were not subject to revision under Section 263 by the PCIT.

What were the facts?

The assessee company converted redeemable preference shares into a loan to its associated enterprise. The Assessing Officer (AO) initially referred international transactions to the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), who determined the Arm's Length Price (ALP) as NIL. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) invoked revisionary powers under Section 263, deeming the assessment order erroneous as prejudicial to revenue for not adding interest on the loan.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT can revise an assessment order under Section 263 when the AO has already referred the international transaction to the TPO and accepted the TPO's determination? Whether the PCIT can indirectly revise the order of the TPO under Section 263 for assessment year prior to 1st April 2022?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 92CA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Karkhanis, Shri Jay Dharod, ARs
For Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande, DR
Hearing: 17.02.203Pronounced: 10.05.2023
1.

Revision Order passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-15, Mumbai, (in short learned ‘PCIT’) for A.Y. 2013-14 on 29th March, 2019, wherein it has been held that the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act read with section 144C(3) of the Act passed on 31st January, 2017, assessing the total loss at ₹673.50 crores is erroneous so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and therefore, the learned PCIT set aside the assessment order directing the learned Assessing Officer to refer the international transaction of Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

Mumbai, Dated: 10.05.2023

2.

The Respondent

3.

CIT DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →