SHIVKRIPA MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), KOLKATA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the PCIT exercised revision jurisdiction in a casual and vague manner, without proper application of mind or giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard on all grounds. Consequently, the PCIT's order was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment order was set aside by the PCIT under Section 263 for de novo assessment. The PCIT noted discrepancies in stock valuation and questioned income from saree sales, without providing specific defects or opportunities to the assessee on the latter point.
What were the issues?
Whether the PCIT correctly exercised revisionary powers under Section 263 by setting aside the assessment order on vague grounds without proper opportunity to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shivkripa Marketing Pvt. Ltd.…...... .........................................……….……Appellant 10, Kiron Shankar Roy Road, Strand Road, Kolkata-1. [PAN: AAQCS8410F] vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Kolkata..……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Amal Kamat, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : June 9, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : June 9, 2022
ORDER
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 08.11.2021 of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [hereinafter referred to as ‘PCIT’]. The assessee is aggrieved by the action of the PCIT in exercising his revision jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and thereby setting aside the assessment order for de novo assessment.
No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite notice, therefore, we proceed to decide this appeal after hearing the ld. DR and after going through the records. 3. The brief facts relating to the issue are that the ld. PCIT noted from the record that in this case there was Nil opening stock and further the purchases were amounting to Rs.2,57,09,500/- and the sales were at Rs.66,48,155/- and the assessee had shown closing stock of Rs.1,68,51,740/-, whereas, the same should have been at Rs.1,90,61,345/-. In reply to the show-cause notice, the assessee furnished details of the account and had shown from the record that during the year that there was loss of Rs.2209605/- which after taking into consideration there was no mismatch in figure. However, the PCIT being Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shivkripa Marketing Pvt. Ltd satisfied with this issue, took up another issue that there was no income from the sale of Sarees without pointing out any defect in the accounts of the assessee. It seems that the ld. PCIT, in a casual manner, had exercised his revision jurisdiction on one ground and set aside the assessment at some other ground even without giving any opportunity to the assessee on the second ground, which otherwise is also a very vague ground without application of mind. In view of this, there is no merit in the impugned order of the ld. PCIT and the same is set aside.
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 →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026