Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

65 ITD 263Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1998#6130 most cited

What is Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax authority for?

The Commissioner can only act under Section 263 on his own motion, not at the instance of the Assessing Officer. If reassessment under Section 147 is possible, Section 263 may not apply to escaped income where no order was passed by the Assessing Officer.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Apollo Tyres Ltd v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax · 65 ITD 263 · Section 263 · Section 147 · Commissioner's suo motu power · Assessing Officer's instance · escaped income

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 147Section 144BSection 80IASection 133ASection 142(1)Section 144

Issues it is cited on

lack of enquirymalabar industrialsection 263(1)erroneous and prejudicialsection 119section 263section 26income-tax officersection 144bsection 142section 11opportunity of being heard

Judgments citing Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

DABUR INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT - 1, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2075/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 35Section 35(1)Section 80GSection 80I

…127 (SC); (vii) ITAT, Delhi in PTC Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT – ITA No.2860/Del/2010 dated 03.04.2018; (viii) Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012; (ix) ITAT, Delhi in CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. 65 ITD 263; (x) Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl.CIT 99 ITR 375; (xi) ITAT, Delhi in Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd. – ITA No.3046/Del/2016 for AY 2009-10 order dated 11.01.2019; (xii) ITAT, Delhi in Ramesh Kumar – ITA No.1982/Del/2018 for AY 2014- 15 order dated 25.01.2019; (xiii) ITAT, Delhi in Shanker Tradex Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT –…

GAURAV KUMAR ARYA,NEW DELHI vs. PCIT -20, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2000/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Gaurav Kumar Arya, Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income 3-P, Pocket-4, Tax, Delhi-20, Kondly Gharoli-Ii, Mayur New Delhi. Vihar, Delhi-1100 96 Pan: Airpa0102C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri K. Sampath & V. RajkumarFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kaushal, CIT (DR)
Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 263

…(India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT, ITA No. 2860/Del/2010 dated 03.04.2018 7. Order of Hon'ble HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012 8. Order of Hon'ble Delhi ITAT in the case of CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd., 65 ITD 263 9. Order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Gee Vee Enterprises vs Addl. CIT, 99 ITR 375 10. Order of Hon'ble Delhi Bench in the case of Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 3046/Del/2016 for A.Y. 2009-10 order dated 11.01.2019 11. Order of Hon'ble Delhi Bench in the case of Ramesh Kumar., ITA No. 1982/Del/2018 for A.Y. 2014-15 ord…

DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-1, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2585/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2019-20] Dlf Home Developers Limited, Vs Pr.Cit, 9Th Floor, Dlf Centre, Sansad Delhi-1, Marg, New Delhi-110001. New Delhi Pan-Aaccd0037H Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri R.S.Singhvi, Ca & Shri Satyajeet Goel, Ca Respondent By Shri Surender Pal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.05.2025

Section 143(3)Section 263

…Order of Hon'ble ITAT F-Bench in the case of PTC Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT, ITA No. 2860/Del/2010 dated 03.04.2018 9. Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs Infosys Technoglies Ltd. 341 IT 293 dated 04.01.2012 10. CIT vs Apollo Tyres Ltd. 65 ITD 263 (ITAT, Delhi) 11. Gee Vee Enterprises vs Addl. CIT 99 ITR 375 (Delhi HC) 12. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt.Ltd. in ITA No.3046/Del/2016 for AY 2009-10 order dated 11.01.2019 13. Ramesh Kumar in ITA No.1982/Del/2018 for AY 2014-15 order dated 25.01.2019 14. Shankar Tradex Pvt.ltd. vs PCIT in ITA No.2999/Del/2017 for AY 2007-08 order dated 16.04.2018…

CITY LAND ASSOCIATES,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 27/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri R.B. AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 263

…t. Understood in its ordinary meaning it is of wide import and is not confined to loss of tax." 6.7 Further reference may be made to the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Bench in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, as reported in the 65 ITD 263 (Delhi), where it has been held as under: "On appeal, the assessee contended (i) that under section 263, the Commissioner could only act suo motu for assuming jurisdiction under section 263 and hence, the action initiated at the instance of the Assessing Officer was null and void ab initio; (ii) that the action taken by the Commissioner in relatio…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR, NAGPUR vs. AMIT KHARA, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 511/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263

…er, he made out case of inadequate enquiry, but he erred in not doing minimal enquiry to ascertain the fact that whether the order is erroneous or not. The learned PCIT has relied on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Bench (E) in the case of AppolloTyres Ltd ACIT (65 ITD 263(Delhi). In this regards we humbly wish to state that the jurisprudence discussed in this case is not relevant for the present case. In this case the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has upheld the jurisdiction of CIT to revoke 263 provision on proposal of the AO and the legality of invoking of 263 provision when alternate course of action in the form of 1…

SUSHILA BHAURAO DESHMUKH,AMRAVATI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 76/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: ShriK.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54BSection 54E

…ial to the revenue in view of Explanation 2 to Section 263 of the I.T. Act. Reliance is placed on the following decisions of Hon'ble Courts. 5.1 The Hon'ble ITAT Bench in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, as reported in the 65 ITD 263 (Delhi) has held as under: It is a well-settled law that where the Assessing Officer fails to make proper inquiries and investigation, such failure on the part of the Assessing Officer will result in prejudice to interests of the revenue and initiation of action under section 263 by the Commissioner under such circumstances will be perfectly valid…

SAN FINANCE CORPORATION,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 40/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 143(3)Section 263

…xpression of art and is not defined in the Act. Understood in its ordinary meaning it is of wide import and is not confined to loss of tax." 8.2 The Hon'ble ITAT Bench in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, as reported in the 65 ITD 263 (Delhi) has held as under: It is a well-settled law that where the Assessing Officer fails to make proper inquiries and investigation, such failure on the part of the San Finance Corporation ITA no.40/Nag./2022 Assessing Officer will result in prejudice to interests of the revenue and initiation of action under section 263 by the Commissioner und…

SPARK MALL AND PARKING PVT. LTD, NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 33/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur11 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…expression of art and is not defined in the Act. Understood in its ordinary meaning it is of wide import and is not confined to loss of tax" 5.2 The Hon'ble ITAT Bench in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, as reported in the 65 ITD 263 (Delhi) has held as under: It is a well-settled law that where the Assessing Officer fails to make proper inquiries and investigation, such failure on the part of the Assessing Officer will result in prejudice to interests of the revenue and initiation of action under section 263 by the Commissioner under such circumstances will be perfectly valid…

OM PRAKASH AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,JAIPUR-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 204/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Us. In This Appeal The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Praveen Saraswat (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…ction 263 become redundant and therefore, the additional ground raised by the assessee shall be rejected. The decision relied upon by the ld. AR of the assessee are on different in facts and in law. The ld. DR has relied upon the following decision: • [1998] 65 ITD 263 (Delhi) Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax • [2016] 67 taxman.com 41 (Kolkata – Trib.) Stewarts & Lloyds of India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Kolkata. 12 OM Prakash Agarwal 9.1 The ld. DR from the above decision drawn our attention to para 3.3, 3.6, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 & 4.9 of the decision of Delhi ITAT i…

PRAMOD AGRAWAL ,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

Accordingly, the grounds of appeal 2 & 3 are dismissed

ITA 43/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sh. Pramod Agrawal (Huf) Pr. Cit-2, 301, Sai Ankur Apartments Nagpur-440 001 Ramdaspeth Vs. Nagpur-440 010 Pan:Aaihp 2699N (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ning it is of wide import and is not confined to loss of tax.” Pramod Agrawal (Huf) vs. PCIT 6.9 Further reference may be made to the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Bench in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, as reported in the 65 ITD 263 (Delhi), where it has been held as under: “On appeal, the assessee contended (i) that under section 263, the Commissioner could only act suo motu for assuming jurisdiction under section 263 and hence, the action initiated at the instance of the Assessing Officer was null and void ab initio; ( ii) that the action taken by the Commissioner in relat…

MAYUR KHARA,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

In the result, Both the appeals of above mentioned assessee’s are allowed

ITA 64/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Above Mentioned Assessees Against Two Different Orders Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Nagpur- 2 Dated 17-02-2017 & 16-02-20217 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Respectively. The Grounds Of Raised By The Above Mentioned Assessees Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…er, he made out case of inadequate enquiry, but he erred in not doing minimal enquiry to ascertain the fact that whether the order is erroneous or not. The learned PCIT has relied on the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Bench (E) in the case of AppolloTyres Ltd ACIT (65 ITD 263(Delhi). In this regards we humbly wish to state that the jurisprudence discussed in this case is not relevant for the present case. In this case the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has upheld the jurisdiction of CIT to revoke 263 provision on proposal of the AO and the legality of invoking of 263 provision when alternate course of action in the form of 1…

ANTARIKSH REALTORS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT-12,, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 1626/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Saktijit Dey ()

Section 143(3)Section 263

…e. In support 7 ITA 1626/Mum/2020 of his contention, learned departmental representative relied upon the following decisions:- 1. CIT vs Amitabh Bachchan in Civil Appeal No.5009 of 2016 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.11621 of 2009] 2. Appollo Tyres Ltd vs ACIT 65 ITD 263 (Delhi) 7. We have considered rival submissions in the light of decisions relied upon and perused materials on record. Undisputedly, assessee’s case was selected under limited scrutiny category for examining the following issues:- (i) Low income in comparison to high loan / advances / investments in shares appearing in balance-sheet; and (ii) Min…

RUTVI OILFIELDS SERVICES PVT LTD,GURGAON vs. PR. CIT, GURGAON

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3291/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

…8] 96 Taxman 1 (SC)/[1998] 231 ITR 53 (SC)/[1997] 143 CTR 406 (SC) ix. PTC Impex (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (ITA No. 2860/Del/2010 dated 03.04.2018) x. CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 order dated 04.01.2012 (Kar. HC) xi. CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. 65 ITD 263 xii. Gee Vee Enterprises vs. Addl. CIT 99 ITR 375 xiii. Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 3046/Del/2016 order dated 11.01.2019) xiv. Ramesh Kumar (ITA No. 1982/Del/2018 order dated 25.01.2019) 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer at the time of…

SWAMI KESHWANAND SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,SIKAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed partly

ITA 273/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 273/Jp/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Cuke C.I.T. (Exemption), Vs. Sansthan, Jaipur (Rajasthan). N.H.11, Bhadhadhar, Sikar-332315 (Raj) Pan No.: Aafts 2816 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shafi Mohammed Chouhan (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(Exemption), Jaipur Dated 16/03/2020 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2010-11, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur Is Illegal & Against The Law Because The Ld. Assessing Officer Has Examined & Considered The Matter Involved In This Order. 2. That The Donation So Received Was Received For A Specific Purpose & Use, Hence It Was Corpus Donation. The Corpus Donation Cannot Be Treated As Part Of Income & Expenditure Account.

For Appellant: Shri Shafi Mohammed Chouhan (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 148Section 263

…TA 273/JP/2020_ Swami Keshwanand Sikshan Sansthan Vs CIT(E) 9. Nagal Garment Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (2020) 113 taxmann.com 4 (MP) 10. Pr.CIT, Ludhiana Vs Venus Woolen Mills, Ludhiana (2019) 105 taxmann.com 287 (P&H) 11. Apollo Tyers Ltd. Vs ACIT (1998) 65 ITD 263 (Delhi) 12. Stewarts and Lloyds of India Ltd. Vs CIT 6. We have heard the ld. Counsels of both the parties and have perused the material placed on record. We have also deliberated upon the decisions cited in the orders passed by the authorities below as well as cited before us and we have also gone through the orders passed by the revenue author…

SHRI GURVINDER SINGH SURI,NEW DELHI vs. PR CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2644/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 2644/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Gurvinder Singh Suri, Vs Pr. Commissioner Of Income C/O M/S Rra Taxindia, Tax (Central)-1, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaps8291D Assessee By : Sh. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. Revenue By : Smt. Sushma Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 02.03.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.05.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 119Section 263Section 263(1)Section 57

…leakage of the revenue is plugged and some tax due to the State not reaching the coffers of the State is prevented by exercise of revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner. [Para 18] 9. Order of Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd., 65 ITD 263 (Copy Enclosed) “A plain reading of section 263 clearly indicates that the Commissioner may call for and examine the records of any proceedings under the Act. For this purpose, he is not required to show as to what reasons prompted him to call for and examine the record. The provisions also do not prescribe any limitation that the Commissioner sh…

RAJGUL CTRDITNVEST P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. PRCIT,DELHI-7, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 2519/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT(DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 44ASection 68

…Perfetti Van Melle India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 3046/Del/2016 for AY 2008-09 order dated 11.1.2019. - ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Ramesh Kumar, ITA No. 1982/Del/2018 for AY 2014-15 dated 25.1.2019. - ITAT, Delhi order in the case of CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. 65 ITD 263. 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the relevant records available with us, especially the impugned order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act alongwith the legal position on the relevant issues which emanates from the various decisions cited before us as well as the Paper Books filed by both the parties and…

RAJESH KUMAR,HISAR vs. CIT, HISAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3337/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Rajesh Kumar, Vs. Cit, 1931, Gate No. 2, Behind Hisar M.G. Road, Hisar Pan :Aohpk1201L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Manoj Kumar, Adv. Respondent By Smt. Sulekha Verma, Cit(Dr)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

…posals. The facts of the instant case being altogether different, the ratio of the said decision cannot be imported over the facts of the instant case. 3.2.6 The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Tribunal in the case of CIT Vs Apollo Tyres Limited reported in 65 ITD 263, where the Tribunal observed as under: “4.1 The provision of s. 263(1) and the relevant Expln. (b) are reproduced hereunder : "263. (1) The CIT may call for an examine the record of any proceedings under this Act, and if he considers that any order passed therein by the AO is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue…

M/S MEWAT GRIT UDYOG,NEW DELHI vs. PR,CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1802/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, advocate&For Respondent: Smt.Sulekha Verma, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 263Section 40

…e Delhi High Court in the case of Gee Vee Enterprises vs. ACIT 99 ITR 375 and also the decisions of the Tribunal in Perfetti Van Melle India Private Limited in ITA 3046/del/2016, Ramesh Kumar in ITA No. 1982 /Del/ 2018 and CIT vs. Apollo tyres Ltd reported in 65 ITD 263 in support of her contentions. 12. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. Insofar as the absence of enquiry or inadequate enquiry is concerned, we have gone through the material available before us. Along with notice under section 142 (1) of the Act, on 7/8/2012, learned Assessing Officer issued a que…

M/S TIRUPATI CONSTRUCTION,HOOGHLY vs. CIT-XX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1186/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri S.M Surana, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: None appeared
Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194C(3)Section 194ISection 263Section 40

…on 5.7.2012. Accordingly, he prayed that the same cannot be the subject matter of revision proceedings u/s. 263 of the Act. He placed reliance on certain decisions in support of his contentions:- • In the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd Vs. ACIT reported in (1998) 65 ITD 263 (Delhi ITAT), wherein it has been held: “6. One of the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the assessee was wholesale cancellation of the assessment order by the CIT was not valid and he should have directed the ITO to make a fresh assessment only with regard to the specific items of income for which the show-cause notice was given under…

Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (65 ITD 263) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax