M/S RISHABH CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the AO had made an inquiry into the issue, even if the PCIT considered it inadequate. The PCIT's order under Section 263 was set aside as the twin conditions of the order being erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue were not satisfied.
What were the facts?
The assessee company, engaged in civil construction and wind power generation, filed its return of income. During scrutiny assessment, the AO questioned a difference between Form 26AS receipts and book entries, which the assessee explained as mobilization advance and GST. The AO accepted the explanation and completed the assessment.
What were the issues?
Whether the PCIT's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was justified when the AO had already made an inquiry into the disputed issue, and whether the inquiry was inadequate.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, JAIPUR
Before: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prakash
PER : PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur-2 [hereinafter referred to as "the learned PCIT"] dated 11.02.2026 passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the assessment year 2022-23, by which the assessment order dated 20.03.2024 passed by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as "the AO") under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act was set aside.
The grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee before us in the memorandum of appeal in Form No. 36 read as under: R
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026