M/S N.A.M. EXPRESSWAY LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 580/HYD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 January 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), Shri K. Narasimha Chary (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had examined the issues regarding ICDS adjustments and amortization of expenses. Therefore, the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, and the PCIT's revisionary order was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee company claimed deductions for amortization of finance costs and adjustments under ICDS. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, holding the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue as these issues were not properly examined by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT was justified in initiating revisionary proceedings under Section 263 when the Assessing Officer had already examined the issues in question.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 37(1),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(10)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Hearing: 30/10/2024

PER. MANJUNATHA G., A.M: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.03.2019 of the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [Ld.PCIT], Hyderabad-4 pertaining to A.Y.2018-19 on the following grounds :

1.

That on the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, order dated 31 March 2024, passed under section 263 of Income-of the Income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), 1961 (“the Act”) by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [Hon'ble PCIT] is bad in law and liable to be quashed.

2 M/s N.A.M.Expressway Limited

2.

That, on

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →