341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd.

341 ITR 180High Court2012#3014 most cited

What is 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner cannot invoke revisionary powers under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer has made an enquiry and taken a possible view, even if another view is also possible. Revision is only permissible when there is an absence of enquiry.

39

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd · 341 ITR 166 · Section 263 · revisionary power · absence of enquiry · two views possible · Assessing Officer · Commissioner of Income Tax

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 147Section 148Section 10(37)Section 145A(b)Section 151Section 56(2)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 141section 282a(1)section 194lasection 56(i)(ccv)section 145a(b)section 145bsection 45(5)section 57(iv)section 56(2)(viii)section 80p(2)(i)section 10(37)doctrine of merger

Judgments citing 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd.

Sh. Randhir Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT Rohtak, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 494/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

Surjeet Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 488/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

Sh. Paramjeet Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 290/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

Dhuni Chand HUF, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 289/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

Sh. Kashmir Singh Sandha, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 288/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

M/S Ganesh Dass HUF, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 287/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

Sh. Arvail Singh, Sirsa vs. PCIT, Rohtak

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 286/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263

…vs. Jyoti Foundation iii) 332 ITR 167 (Del) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. iv) 343 ITR 329 (Del) ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. at pages 339 v) 341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT vs. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. vi) 212 Taxman 184 (Del) CIT vs. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. vii) 341 ITR 180 (Del) CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. viii) 360 ITR 44 (Del) CIT vs. New Delhi Television Ltd. ix) 236 CTR 476 (Del), CIT vs. Vikas Polymers “10. As regards the scope and ambit of the expression "erroneous", a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd., (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), held with referen…

Alliance Nirmaan Limited, Bareilly vs. PCIT, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 119/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich is patently unsustainable inlaw, the Commissioner of Income-tax can exercise his powers under Section 263 where a loss of revenue results as a consequence of the view adopted by the Assessing Officer. CIT v. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd., (341 ITR 180) (Del.); "The phrase "prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue" has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the Assessing Officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. For example, when an Income-tax Officer adopted one of…

Jarnail Singh, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 395/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 263

…ent enquiry by the Assessing officer does not entitle invocation of revisional power and in support thereof, reliance was placed on the following judgments: • CIT vs. Anil Kumar Sharma 335 ITR 83 (Del HC) • CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. 341 ITR 180 (Del HC) • Hari Iron Trading Co. vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 437 (P & H) • CTT vs. Gabriel (India) Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR-108 (Bom) • Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 243-ITR-83 (SC) • CIT vs. Max India Ltd. 295 ITR 282(SC) • CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. reported in 332 ITR 16(Del) • Sh. Narian Singla vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Cen…

Jarnail Singh, Bilaspur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Chandigarh

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 394/CHANDI/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 263

…ent enquiry by the Assessing officer does not entitle invocation of revisional power and in support thereof, reliance was placed on the following judgments: • CIT vs. Anil Kumar Sharma 335 ITR 83 (Del HC) • CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. 341 ITR 180 (Del HC) • Hari Iron Trading Co. vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 437 (P & H) • CTT vs. Gabriel (India) Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR-108 (Bom) • Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 243-ITR-83 (SC) • CIT vs. Max India Ltd. 295 ITR 282(SC) • CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. reported in 332 ITR 16(Del) • Sh. Narian Singla vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Cen…

Horizon Dwellings Private Limited, Bareilly vs. PCIT, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 77/LKW/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 Jan 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriahorizon Dwellings Pvt Ltd V. Pcit, Bareilly, Navjeevan Appartments, Income Tax Department, Opposite Parag Factory, Bareilly (Up)-243001. Badaun Road, Kargaina, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aacch6839F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 143(3)Section 263

…hich is patently unsustainable in law, the Commissioner of Income-tax can exercise his powers under Section 263 where a loss of revenue results as a consequence of the view adopted by the Assessing Officer. CIT v. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd.,(341 ITR 180) (Del.); "The phrase "prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue" has to be read in conjunction with an erroneous order passed by the Assessing Officer. Every loss of revenue as a consequence of an order of the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. For example, when an Income-tax Officer adopted one of…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Gurugram vs. M/S Maharishi Markandeshwar University Trust

ITA/41/2021HC Punjab & Haryana24 Sept 2024

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Section 11(1)(a)Section 263

…ITA No. 41 of 2021 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 24.09.2024 1. ITA No. 41 of 2021 (O&M) Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Circle), Gurugram … Appellant versus M/s Maharishi Markandeshwar University Trust … Respondent 2. ITA No. 47 of 2021 (O&M) Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Circle), Gurugram … Appellant versus M/s Maharishi Markandeshwar University Trust … Respondent 3. ITA No. 57 of 2021 (O&M) Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Circle), Gurugram … Appellant versus M/s Maharishi Markandeshwa…

The Mullanpur Garibdas Co-Op Multipurpose Society, Mohali vs. DCIT, C-6(1), Mohali

ITA 645/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Singh, CIT, DR
Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…AO passed the Assessment Order, accepting the returned income of the assessee society. Therefore, there was no occasion for the revisionary provisions to have been invoked by the ld. PCIT. 18. In 'CIT Versus Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Cor. Ltd.', 341 ITR 180 (Del), it was held that the Tribunal had rightly held that the case was not a case where the enquiries were not made by the AOs or the relevant material was not collected before framing the Assessment Orders; that the observation of the Commissioner that the Income Tax Officers did not make sufficient enquiry was totally subjective; that it was…

The Mullanpur Garibdas Co-Op Multipurpose Society, Mullanpur vs. Pr. CIT-II, Chandigarh

ITA 569/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Singh, CIT, DR
Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…AO passed the Assessment Order, accepting the returned income of the assessee society. Therefore, there was no occasion for the revisionary provisions to have been invoked by the ld. PCIT. 18. In 'CIT Versus Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Cor. Ltd.', 341 ITR 180 (Del), it was held that the Tribunal had rightly held that the case was not a case where the enquiries were not made by the AOs or the relevant material was not collected before framing the Assessment Orders; that the observation of the Commissioner that the Income Tax Officers did not make sufficient enquiry was totally subjective; that it was…

The Mullanpur Garibdas Co-Op Multipurpose Society, Mohali vs. Pr. CIT-II, Chandigarh

ITA 515/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Garima Singh, CIT, DR
Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…AO passed the Assessment Order, accepting the returned income of the assessee society. Therefore, there was no occasion for the revisionary provisions to have been invoked by the ld. PCIT. 18. In 'CIT Versus Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Cor. Ltd.', 341 ITR 180 (Del), it was held that the Tribunal had rightly held that the case was not a case where the enquiries were not made by the AOs or the relevant material was not collected before framing the Assessment Orders; that the observation of the Commissioner that the Income Tax Officers did not make sufficient enquiry was totally subjective; that it was…

Shri Vijay Kumar Singhla, Mansa vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 100/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 69A

…Section 263 of the said Act, merely because he has a different opinion in the matter." No substantial question of law arises for our consideration. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed”. • CIT vs. HINDUSTAN MARKETING AND ADVERTISING COR. LTD. As reported in 341 ITR 180 (Del HC) “When we examine the order of the Tribunal juxtaposition and comparing the orders of the Assessing Officers with those of the Commissioner under Section 263 of the Act, we find that the Tribunal has rightly held that present case is not a case where the enquiries were not made by the Assessing Officer or the relevant material was not co…

C.M. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. Pr.CIT- 2, Delhi

ITA 6202/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263

…5, ITAT Delhi Bench. • Crown Frozen Foods vs. Addl.CIT 93 TTJ 485 ITAT Mumbai Bench. • Pawan Kumar vs AO, 106 TTJ 494 ITAT Jodhpur Bench. • CIT vs. Bharat Aluminium Co. Ltd., (2008) 303 ITR 256 (Del). • CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. 341 ITR 180 • (Del.). • CIT vs. Design & Automation Engineers (Bombay) (P) Ltd., 323 ITR 632 (Bom). 4. Ld DR however supported the findings of Ld. Tax authorities. 5. It can be appreciated form the impugned order that the primarily the Ld Revisional authority was not convinced as to how only on the basis of affidavit by the partner of M/s Cardio Technoventi…

Shrimati. Lata Narang, Jalandhar vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Jalandhar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 35/ASR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Rajinder Kaur, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 5(2)Section 6

…ed by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment, the CIT is not competent to re-adjudicate the same issue by invoking the provisions of section 263. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd [2012] 341 ITR 180 (Delhi) held as under:-"/?ev/s/o« - 9 Lata Narang v. Pr. CIT Powers of Commissioner - Assessment after enquiry -No error in order - Order cannot be revised on ground of enquiry -Should have been more detailed." The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Amit Corporation 21 Taxman.Com 64 (Gujarat) held that where Assessing officer a…

Smt. Indermeet Bains W/O Sh. D.S. Bains, Bathinda vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bathinda

The appeal of the assessee is disposed of in the term indicated as above

ITA 250/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal & Sh. P.N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amlendu Nath Misra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…rh Bench, Chandigarh in the case of Surinder Kaur in ITA No. 86/Chd/2021 vide order dated 06.05.2022 on the issue of u/s 263. v). Loil Continental Foods Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT in ITA No. 577/Chd/2019 Chd-Trib. vi). CIT vs. Hindustan Marketing & Advertising Co. Ltd. 341 ITR 180 Delhi-HC vii). Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Anil Kumar Sharma 335 ITR 180 Delhi- HC. 7. Further, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee relied upon on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay Court, in the case of ‘Sh. Nirav Modi’ reported in 71 Taxmann.com 273, wherein the order u/s 263 was set aside, since the Ld. Assessing Officer had examined the issue…

Shri Rajinder Singh, Shimla vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 28/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Aug 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt.Diva Singh & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Rajinder Singh बनाम Pr. Cit-1 M/S R.S. Traders, Gunj Road Chandigarh Shimla

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…er so passed by the AO cannot be held to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. In support, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Marketing & Advertising Co. Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 180 as well as decision of Coordinate Chandigarh Benches in the case of M/s Colors Textiles Limited Vs. The ITO (in ITA No. 1514/Chd/2017 dt. 05/12/2018). 3. Per contra, the Ld. CIT/ DR, at the outset, fairly submitted that in para 6 of the impugned order, apparently there is some typographical error wherein the Ld. Pr. CIT has mentioned about certa…

341 ITR 166 (Del) CIT v. Leisure Wear Exports Ltd. (341 ITR 180) — Cited in 39 Judgments | BharatTax