WESTWELL BIO REFINERIES PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), PATNA, PATNA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee was provided with an inadequate opportunity to be heard by the PCIT, violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the PCIT for fresh consideration with adequate opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment order for AY 2022-23 was set aside by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act for alleged lack of proper inquiry. The assessee argued that the PCIT's order was bad in law and violated principles of natural justice due to a very short notice period.
What were the issues?
Whether the PCIT's order under Section 263 was passed without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee, thus violating principles of natural justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA ‘DB’ BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Patna [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'PCIT'] passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for AY 2022-23 dated 31.03.2026. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:
"
In law and on the facts and the circumstances of the case of the appellant, the order us 263 of the act passed by Ld. PCIT is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.
In law and on the facts and the circumstances of the case of the appellant, the Ld. PCIT has erred in
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 →- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026