GOLDMOHUR DESIGN AND APPAREL PARK LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMM. OF INCOME TAX - 7, MUMBAI

ITA 3971/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 July 2020AY 2012-1334 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT's order under Section 263 was bad in law due to breach of principles of natural justice and non-application of mind. The Tribunal also found that the assessment order was not erroneous and not prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee company claimed depreciation on leasehold rights capitalized from stamp duty paid for a lease agreement. The Assessing Officer (AO) allowed this claim after scrutiny. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, considering the AO's order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT correctly assumed jurisdiction under Section 263 and if the AO's assessment order allowing depreciation on leasehold rights was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 32(1)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(30)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, “G” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, Ms. Dinkle Hariya &, Shri Divyesh Fataria, A.Rs
For Respondent: Shri. T. Kipgen &, Shri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, D.Rs
Hearing: 06.03.2020Pronounced: 31.07.2020

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-7, Mumbai (for short ‗Pr. CIT‘) under Sec. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‗Act‘), dated 30.03.2017 for A.Y. 2012-13. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us:

“1. BREACH OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.

1.1.

The Learned Principal Commissioner of Income - tax - 7, Mumbai ["Ld. CIT"], erred in framing the

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 →