CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.

341 ITR 293High Court2012#442 most cited

What is CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. authority for?

A Commissioner can revise an assessment order under Section 263 if it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. This includes cases where the Assessing Officer fails to make further inquiries before accepting the assessee's statements in the return.

205

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. · Section 263 · lack of enquiry · erroneous and prejudicial to revenue · Commissioner revisionary power · Assessing Officer duty to inquire · revision of assessment order · 2012 Karnataka High Court

Also reported as

17 Taxmann.com 203237 CTR 141

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 32Section 132Section 153ASection 142(1)Section 14ASection 37

Issues it is cited on

csr expendituresection 135lack of enquirymalabar industrialapplication of incomedisallowance under section 14aerroneous and prejudicialcapital expendituresection 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)liable to taxdisallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.

AMBUJA CEMENTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PCIT, MUMBAI-3, MUMBAI

ITA 3474/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Sourabh Soparkar, AR (virtually appear)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…ssessment orders are rendered erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue on this count also. In support of this proposition, the LdPCIT took support of the decision rendered by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Infosys Technologies Ltd., [341 ITR 293], wherein the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has held that non-discussion of claim of deduction allowed by the AO in the assessment order would make it erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Accordingly, the Ld.PCIT held that the assessment orders passed by the AO for both the years under consideration are rendered erroneous and…

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

…ITR 162 (Cal); (vi) Rajmandir Estates (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2017) 245 taxman 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…

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

…ann.com 285 (SC)/[2017] 245 Taxman 127 (SC) 6. 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 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.…

JAYARAM REDDY BOOPESH REDDY,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BENGALURU

In the result the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 711/BANG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…High Court in MRF Ltd. reported in 128 taxmann.com 21, where expenses on setting up a pace foundation were allowed under section 37(1) because they contributed to brand promotion. Similarly, the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Infosys Technologies reported in 360 ITR 714 and Kanhaiyalal Dudharia reported in 418 ITR 410 had accepted expenses incurred for non-traditional branding and goodwill as allowable business expenditure. On this basis, the ld. AR argued that showcasing luxury cars with the Bren brand name clearly fell within the realm of legitimate business expenditure. 11.4 The ld. AR further pointed out tha…

JAYARAMA REDDY BOOPESH REDDY,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), BENGALURU

ITA 706/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Chodhry & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Bharat, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shivanad Kalakeri, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 153A

…High Court in MRF Ltd. reported in 128 taxmann.com 21, where expenses on setting up a pace foundation were allowed under section 37(1) because they contributed to brand promotion. Similarly, the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Infosys Technologies reported in 360 ITR 714 and Kanhaiyalal Dudharia reported in 418 ITR 410 had accepted expenses incurred for non-traditional branding and goodwill as allowable business expenditure. On this basis, the Id. AR argued that showcasing luxury cars with the Bren brand name clearly fell within the realm of legitimate business expenditure. 11.4 The Id. AR further pointed out tha…

JAYPEE FERTILIZERS & INDUSTRIES LTD.,NOIDA vs. PR.CIT, NOIDA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1047/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35D

…T dated 30 March, 2015 is relevant to note as it relates to the aspect of lack of inquiry at the end of the AO for valid initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Act.  Hon'ble HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012 has held that section 263 is a section which enables the Commissioner to have a look at the orders or proceedings of the lower authorities and to effect a correction, if so needed, particularly if the order or proceeding is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. It is also held that the Commissioner can regard…

DHWANI FINSERVE PVT LTD,RAJKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAJKOT

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

ITA 389/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot11 Apr 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Naimish Vayawala &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट "ायपीठ, राजकोट । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.389/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Dhwani Finserve Pvt.Ltd. बनाम/ The Principal A-204, Kadamb Hights Commissioner of Income Vs. Opp. Arjun Party Plot Tax-1 Kalawad Road Rajkot – 360 001 Rajkot Sau Uni Area S.O., Rajkot–360 005 (Gujarat) "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAECD 1108 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""थ" / Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Naimish Vayawala & Shri Bhav…

SHREE BALAJI ASSOCIATES PUNE LLP,PUNE vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1008/PUN/2024[AY 2019 - 20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 43C

…dated 30 March, 2015 is relevant to note as it relates to the aspect of lack of inquiry at the end of the AO for valid initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Act. • Hon'ble High Court OF Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012 has held that section 263 6 ITA Nos.1007 & 1008/PUN/2024 is a section which enables the Commissioner to have a look at the orders or proceedings of the lower authorities and to effect a correction, if so needed, particularly if the order or proceeding is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, It is also held…

SHREE BALAJI ASSOCIATES PUNE LLP,PUNE vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1007/PUN/2024[AY 2018 - 19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

Section 132Section 153ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 43C

…CIT dated 30 March, 2015 is relevant to note as it relates to the aspect of lack of inquiry at the end of the AO for valid initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Act. Hon'ble High Court OF Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012 has held that section 263 6 ITA Nos.1007 & 1008/PUN/2024 is a section which enables the Commissioner to have a look at the orders or proceedings of the lower authorities and to effect a correction, if so needed, particularly if the order or proceeding is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, It is also held th…

GOEL EISHA CAPITALS,PUNE vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1006/PUN/2024[AY 2019 - 20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…T dated 30 March, 2015 is relevant to note as it relates to the aspect of lack of inquiry at the end of the AO for valid initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Act. • Hon'ble High Court OF Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012 has held that section 263 is a section which enables the Commissioner to have a look at the orders or proceedings of the lower authorities and to effect a correction, if so needed, particularly if the order or proceeding is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. It is also held that the Commissioner can regard…

RAJENDRA RAMESHLAL GUGALE,PUNE vs. PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1676/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, CIT
Section 1Section 127Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 263Section 269SSection 69C

…ated 30 March, 2015 is relevant to note as it relates to the aspect of lack of inquiry at the end of the AO for valid initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Act. • Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012 has held that section 263 is a section which enables the Commissioner to have a look at the orders or proceedings of the lower authorities and to effect a correction, if so needed, particularly if the order or proceeding is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. It is also held that the Commissioner can regard…

AGRICOM FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) MUMBAI-2, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2716/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Dr.K.R.Subhash,CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…sessment orders are rendered erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue on this count also. In support of this proposition, the Ld PCIT took support of the decision rendered by Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Infosys Technologies Ltd., [341 ITR 293], wherein the Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court has held that non-discussion of claim of deduction allowed by the AO in the assessment order would make it erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Accordingly, the Ld.PCIT held that the assessment orders passed by the AO for both the years under consideration are rendered erroneous and…

AGRICOM FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2709/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Dr.K.R.Subhash,CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263

…sessment orders are rendered erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue on this count also. In support of this proposition, the Ld PCIT took support of the decision rendered by Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Infosys Technologies Ltd., [341 ITR 293], wherein the Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court has held that non-discussion of claim of deduction allowed by the AO in the assessment order would make it erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Accordingly, the Ld.PCIT held that the assessment orders passed by the AO for both the years under consideration are rendered erroneous and…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4081/DEL/2010[2003-04]Status: PendingITAT Delhi12 Mar 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR

…Bom) • CIT v. Force Motors Ltd.: ITA No. 5296 of 2010 (Bom) • CIT v. Sundaram Industries Ltd 240 ITR 335 (Mad) • Gujarat State Export Corporation Ltd. v. CIT: 209 ITR 649 (Guj.) • CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.: 205 Taxman 59 (Kar) • Assam Brook Ltd. v CIT: 267 ITR 121 (Cal) • DCIT v. Max India Ltd (2007) 112 TTJ (Asr.) 726 (Bom); • American Express International Banking Corporation v CIT 258 ITR 601. The Ld. AR further submitted that the aforesaid issue is also covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assessment years 2001-02, 2002-03, 2004-O5, 2005-…

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2486/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…he fixed asset was application of income and depreciation on the same amount i.e. value of fixed asset is for the use of the asset. 21) Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd (360 ITR 714) (copy enclosed as Annexure B). In the said case, the assessee paid donation out of the unit eligible to claim exemption u/s. 10A of the Act. The donation was disallowed while computing income from of the unit but as the entire income was exempt the Page No. 58 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd.…

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2485/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…he fixed asset was application of income and depreciation on the same amount i.e. value of fixed asset is for the use of the asset. 21) Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd (360 ITR 714) (copy enclosed as Annexure B). In the said case, the assessee paid donation out of the unit eligible to claim exemption u/s. 10A of the Act. The donation was disallowed while computing income from of the unit but as the entire income was exempt the Page No. 58 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd.…

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 2(1) , INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 319/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…CIT vs. Ameriprise India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.206/2016) and PCIT vs. Finserv. 17/2016 as well as PCIT vs. Cashedge India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.279/2016). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 349 ITR 606 ITR and CIT vs. Encore Software Limited (ITA No.1142/2006). 18. As regards working capital adjustment, the Ld. AR submitted that the TPO gave the working capital adjustment, however, the margins of the comparable companies were incorrectly computed. Pursuant to directions issued by the DRP, the assessee gave updated working capital computation a…

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCE CORPORATION INDIA PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. THE ACIT-CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 292/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…CIT vs. Ameriprise India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.206/2016) and PCIT vs. Finserv. 17/2016 as well as PCIT vs. Cashedge India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.279/2016). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 349 ITR 606 ITR and CIT vs. Encore Software Limited (ITA No.1142/2006). 18. As regards working capital adjustment, the Ld. AR submitted that the TPO gave the working capital adjustment, however, the margins of the comparable companies were incorrectly computed. Pursuant to directions issued by the DRP, the assessee gave updated working capital computation a…

M/S. COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(1), INDORE

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 179/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…CIT vs. Ameriprise India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.206/2016) and PCIT vs. Finserv. 17/2016 as well as PCIT vs. Cashedge India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.279/2016). The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd., 349 ITR 606 ITR and CIT vs. Encore Software Limited (ITA No.1142/2006). 18. As regards working capital adjustment, the Ld. AR submitted that the TPO gave the working capital adjustment, however, the margins of the comparable companies were incorrectly computed. Pursuant to directions issued by the DRP, the assessee gave updated working capital computation a…

MR. RAMANLAL RAGHABHI PATEL ,DAMAN vs. THE PCIT, VALSAD, VALSAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 105/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.105/Srt/2022 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Ramanlal Raghabhai Patel, Vs. The Pcit, Valsad. Near Check Post, Dabhel, Daman – 396210, Daman & Diu (Ut). (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Accpp2952J

Section 143(3)Section 263

…been made and not because there is anything wrong with the order if all the facts stated therein are assumed to be correct. We note that ld PCIT has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of KARNATAKA in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 341 ITR 293 dated 04.01.2012, wherein it was held as under: "Section 263 is a section which enables the Commissioner to have a look at the orders or proceedings of the lower authorities and to effect a correction, if so needed, particularly if the order or proceeding is erroneous and prejudicial to Ramanlal Raghabhai Patel the interest of the revenue. This p…

Showing 1–20 of 205 · Page 1 of 11

...