KEYSTONE REALTORS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL) -1, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2903/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 January 2025AY 2018-19Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's Authorized Representative sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The Departmental Representative did not object. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the PCIT invoking Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that the assessment order was passed after due examination and the PCIT's order was based on a change of opinion and lacked jurisdiction. The appeal was filed for Assessment Year 2017-18.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT's order under Section 263 was justified, or if it was passed without jurisdiction based on a change of opinion after a valid assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Waseem Khan
For Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Hearing: 27.01.2025Pronounced: 28.01.2025

Assessee by : Shri Mohd. Waseem Khan Revenue by : Shri Biswanath Das Date of Hearing 27.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Mumbai-1 [hereinafter referred to as “PCIT”] dated 20.03.2024 passed u/s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2017-18.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Pr. CIT Central -

1. (herein after referred as 'PCIT") erred in invoking provisions of Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') by issuing the notice inspite of the fact that assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act has been completed after due examination and application of mind. Further the A.Y. 2018-19 Keystone Realtors Ltd. order u/s 263 is also passed merely setting aside the assessment to the file of the learned assessing officer to conduct proper inquiry which is unjustified. It is therefore submitted that the order passed u/s 263 should be quashed.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and I in law, the PCIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act,1961 without jurisdiction as the order passed was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. It is therefore submitted that the order passed u/s 263 should be quashed as the same is illegal, void and bad in law.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the PCIT has erred in passing the order u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the basis of change of opinion which is barred by the law.

3.

At the outset, Ld. AR has sought permission of the Bench to withdraw the appeal. Ld. DR has not objected to the proposition.

4.

We, therefore, dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.01.2025.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →