MFAR HOLDINGS PVT. LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. PR. CIT, BANGALORE

ITA 634/BANG/2015Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 August 2015AY 2010-1112 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had not applied his mind to the facts and had failed to conduct necessary enquiries regarding the conversion of investment to stock-in-trade and the alleged cash transactions. Therefore, the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a business loss on the sale of inventory converted from investment, and the Pr. CIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, alleging the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The Pr. CIT also questioned the lack of penalty proceedings for alleged cash transactions violating Sections 269SS and 269T.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue due to the AO's lack of enquiry into the conversion of investment to stock-in-trade and alleged cash transactions. Whether the Pr. CIT was justified in invoking Section 263 powers.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 45(2),Section 269SS,Section 269T,Section 271D,Section 271E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH C, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI. N. V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI. ABRAHAM P. GEORGE

For Appellant: Shri. Cherian K Baby, CA

PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

In this appeal filed by assessee, it assails an order dt.27.02.2015 of the Pr. CIT -4, Bengaluru, passed u/s.263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short), for the assessment year 2010-11. 02. Assessee has raised the following grounds :

1.

The learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4, Bangalore has erred in acting outside the juri iction vested in him under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as he has failed to establish that the impugned order of assessment under section 143(3) of that Act is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

ITA.634/Bang/2015 Page - 2

2.

The lear

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 →