ARIHANT ROLLER FLOUR MILLS,JIND, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 JIND, HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 942/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 July 2026AY 2018-199 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO had conducted adequate inquiries and adopted a possible view, which was not perverse. Therefore, the revisionary order under Section 263 was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment order was revised by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) under Section 263, who believed the Assessing Officer (AO) erred by applying a GP rate on alleged bogus transactions instead of adding the full amounts. The assessee argued that the AO had conducted sufficient inquiry and adopted a possible view.

What were the issues?

Whether the Pr. CIT was justified in invoking revisionary powers under Section 263 when the AO had conducted adequate inquiries and adopted a possible view in the assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 144,Section 260,Section 144B,Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 133(6),Section 145(3),Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 69C,Section 271AAC,Section 271AAD,Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →