Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of

286 ITR 126High Court2006#3053 most cited

What is Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of authority for?

The Commissioner cannot invoke revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 merely because the Assessing Officer conducted inquiries, even if the Commissioner believes more inquiries were warranted. The fact that inquiries were made by the Assessing Officer is sufficient.

39

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT vs Mangilal Didwani · section 263 · erroneous and prejudicial · revisionary powers · Assessing Officer enquiry · Commissioner's jurisdiction · adequate enquiry · judicial pronouncements · CIT vs Arvind Jewellers · 286 ITR 126

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Chennai v. M/s. Accel Limited 421 of

Showing 120 of 39 · Page 1 of 2