ELLORA INRATECH PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PR.CIT- 3, NEW DELHI

ITA 258/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 October 2023AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA (Accountant Member)27 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Pr.CIT erred in invoking Section 263 as the AO had made reasonable inquiries, and the Pr.CIT's reliance on old search material and the failure to provide the assessee with an opportunity to confront new material were flawed. The Tribunal found the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 to be without authority of law.

What were the facts?

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr.CIT) initiated proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to revise an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Pr.CIT alleged that the AO failed to conduct sufficient inquiries into unsecured loans of Rs. 8 crore received by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the Pr.CIT correctly invoked Section 263 of the IT Act when the AO had made sufficient inquiries, and whether the revisional order was passed without proper application of mind and adherence to principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(7)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, DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI

Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Adv. Shri Shivang Bansal, Adv
For Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the revisional order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-03, New Delhi (‘Pr.CIT’ in short) dated 28.03.2018 passed under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1963 (the Act) whereby the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 21.06.2016 concerning AY 2013-14 was sought to be set aside for reframing the assessment afresh in exercise of supervisory juri iction.

2.

The assessee has raised multiple grounds and has essentially challenged the assumption of juri

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 →