CIT v. Greenworld Corporation

314 ITR 81Supreme Court of India2009#472 most cited

What is CIT v. Greenworld Corporation authority for?

The Commissioner can revise an assessment order under Section 263 only if the Assessing Officer's order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Assessing Officer must have applied their mind and taken a possible view for the revision to be invalid.

197

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Greenworld Corporation · Section 263 · erroneous assessment · prejudicial to revenue · commissioner revision powers · adequate enquiry · possible view · judicial function · appellate jurisdiction · conditions for revision

Also reported as

181 Taxmann 111

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 143(2)Section 68Section 115BBE
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

inadequate enquiryrevision u/s 263malabar industriallack of enquirysection 263(1)revision under section 263assessment order erroneoussection 120section 144aerroneous and prejudicialsection 119section 263

Judgments citing CIT v. Greenworld Corporation

Sishma Singh, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 561/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…essment made on the basis of borrowed satisfaction or at the dictum of the higher authorities is illegal and bad in law. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Greenworld Corporation, 314 ITR 81 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Shri Subhash Singh, Bharatpur and Others. Court has held that by no stretch of imagination a higher authority can interfere with the independence of the assessing authority which is the basic feature of any statutory scheme involving adjudicatory process. The ld. A/R has also relied upon the Hon’ble Jur…

Vimlesh Faujdar, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 560/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…essment made on the basis of borrowed satisfaction or at the dictum of the higher authorities is illegal and bad in law. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Greenworld Corporation, 314 ITR 81 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Shri Subhash Singh, Bharatpur and Others. Court has held that by no stretch of imagination a higher authority can interfere with the independence of the assessing authority which is the basic feature of any statutory scheme involving adjudicatory process. The ld. A/R has also relied upon the Hon’ble Jur…

Subhash Singh, Jaipur vs. Ac, Bharatpur

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 289/JPR/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2018AY 2006-07
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…essment made on the basis of borrowed satisfaction or at the dictum of the higher authorities is illegal and bad in law. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Greenworld Corporation, 314 ITR 81 (SC) and submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Shri Subhash Singh, Bharatpur and Others. Court has held that by no stretch of imagination a higher authority can interfere with the independence of the assessing authority which is the basic feature of any statutory scheme involving adjudicatory process. The ld. A/R has also relied upon the Hon’ble Jur…

Acc Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 4581/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acc Ltd. (Formerly Known Commissioner Of As The Associated Cement Income Tax-Ltu Vs. Companies Ltd.) Cement Mumbai. House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai. Pan No. Aaact1507C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Yogesh Thar, Ar Revenue By : Mr. R.P. Meena, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/10/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. R.P. Meena, CIT DR
Section 263Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2010-11 ACC Ltd. (Formerly known Commissioner of as The Associated Cement Income Tax-LTU Vs. Companies Ltd.) Cement Mumbai. House, 121, M.K. Road, Mumbai. PAN No. AAACT1507C Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Yogesh Thar, AR Revenue by : Mr. R.P. Meena, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 24/07/2018 Date of pronouncement : 15/10/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2010-11. The appeal is d…

Gumpro Drilling Fluids Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 15, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2868/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2013-14 Gumpro Drilling Fluids Vs Pr. Cit-15, Private Limited, Room No.517, 5Th Floor, Opp. Karma Stambha, Aayakar Bhavan, Hazarat Compound, Lbs M. K. Road, Marg, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400083 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aadcg2319N "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Ashok J. Patil राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri L.K.S. Dahiya Cit-Dr

Section 120Section 144ASection 263Section 35

…ion. At the same time, if another view is possible, 20 revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look a…

Maharashtra Airport Development, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 3, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3741/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Maharashtra Airport Pr. Cit-3, Development Company 612, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 8Th Floor, World Trade M. K. Road, Centre, Tower No.1, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aadcm9623M

Section 148Section 154Section 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘बी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘B’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s Maharashtra Airport Pr. CIT-3, Development Company 612, 6th Floor, बनाम/ Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 8th Floor, World Trade M. K. Road, Centre, Tower No.1, Mumbai-400020 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No. AADCM9623M "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Salil Kapoor & Shri Sumit Lalchand…

Manoir Petro India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 1, Mumbai

ITA 2626/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2010-11 Manoir Petro India Limited, Pr. Cit-1 602, B-Wing, Universal Room No.387, बनाम/ Business Park, Chandivali 3Rd Floor, Vs. Farm Road, Off Saki Vihar Aayakar Bhavan, Road, Andheri (East), M. K. Road, Mumbai-400072 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aafcm5210J

Section 263

…rmissible. Our view 22 Manoir Petro India Limited ITA No.2626/Mum/2015 & C.O. No.95/Mum/2015 is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look at…

The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Shri H Nagaraja

ITA/605/2017HC Karnataka29 May 2018

Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV,B.S PATIL

Section 153ASection 260ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…isional Commissioner was not right and justified in insisting for profiting details for service as the same was not permissible in law. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT VS GREENWORLD 11 CORPORATION – (2009) 314 ITR 81 (SC), CIT VS M/S. IGATE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LTD., in ITA No.771/2009 disposed of on 28.11.2014, and CIT VS SAP LABS PVT. LTD. in ITA No.842/2008 disposed of on 25.08.2014. 11. We have heard the learned Counsel for both parties at length. 12. Regarding first point urged by the Revenue:- It is apparent from the facts involved in the case t…

General Computer Services International, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 31, Mumbai

ITA 2459/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anant N. Pai, A.RFor Respondent: Sh. Jayant Kumar, CIT, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…CIT Vs. Gabriel India Ltd. (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bom) & CIT Vs. Fine Jewellery (I) Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 303 (Bom) and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Max India Ltd. (2007) 295 ITR 282 (SC) & CIT Vs. Greenworld Corporation (2009) 314 ITR 81 (SC). It was further vehemently submitted by the Ld. A.R. that as the A.O after making necessary inquiries and perusing the TP Study Report had formed a view that the transactions entered into by the assessee with its WOS were not in the nature of a transaction referred to in Sec. 92B of the Act, and the Transfer Pricing provisions were not applic…

Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Chennai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2168/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Smt. Ruby George, CITFor Respondent: 08.03.2018
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234A(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2167 & 2168/CHNY/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) M/s. Chennai Central Co-operative Bank Vs The ACIT, Limited, Non Corporate Circle -11, Chennai C/o. M/s. Ramesh and Ramachandran, Chartered Accountants, New No.39, Old No.29/3, Viswanathapuram Main Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024 PAN: AAAAC0982C (अप…

Chennai Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Chennai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Chennai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2167/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Smt. Ruby George, CITFor Respondent: 08.03.2018
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234A(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.2167 & 2168/CHNY/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) M/s. Chennai Central Co-operative Bank Vs The ACIT, Limited, Non Corporate Circle -11, Chennai C/o. M/s. Ramesh and Ramachandran, Chartered Accountants, New No.39, Old No.29/3, Viswanathapuram Main Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai – 600 024 PAN: AAAAC0982C (अप…

Saigal Sea Trade, Mumbai vs. CIT -18, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2511/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Saigal Sea Trade, Cit-18, J.V. House, 02Nd Floor, D.S. Piramal Chambers, बनाम/ Babrekar Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400028 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaafs6920K

Section 142(1)Section 263

…ration. At the same time, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in 21 M/s Trancfex Studios Pvt Ltd. CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables th…

Gautam Tube Corporation, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 19, Mumbai

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA 3609/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 263

…ration. At the same time, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in ITA No.3608 & 3609Mum/2017 13 Gautam Tube Corporation CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of…

Gautam Tube Corporation, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 19, Mumbai

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA 3608/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 120Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 263

…ration. At the same time, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in ITA No.3608 & 3609Mum/2017 13 Gautam Tube Corporation CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of…

Mumbai District Central Co Op Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 1(1), Mumbai

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA 3198/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2010-11 The Mumbai District Cit-1, Aayakar Bhavan बनाम/ Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. M.K. Road, Mumbai Bank Bhavan Mumbai 400 020 Vs. 207, D.H. Road, Fort Mumbai 400 001 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaaam3185D यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By Shri Amar Gahlot याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B. Srinivas, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/03/2018 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 22/03/2018

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and 22 The Mumbai District Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look at t…

Startech Engineers, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 22, Mumbai

The appeals are disposed of in the above terms

ITA 3898/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Startech Engineers, Pr. Commissioner Of G-12, Sinhgarjane Soc. Income Tax-22, बनाम/ Maratha Colony, Room No.409, 4Th Floor, Vs. Santracruz (E), Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai-400055 Mumbai-400012 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaxfs3063J "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri D.C.Saboo & Shri Shyam Saboo राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Manjunatha Swamy-Dr

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…me, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 Taxmann 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 13 Startech Engineers 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look a…

ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Canara Bank Securities Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 821/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-2(1)(4), M/S Canara Bank Securities Room No.553, 5Th Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 7Th Floor, Maker Chamber-Iii, Vs. M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaacg2218H

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263oSection 56

…n this case is not cumulatively met and proceedings u/s 263 of the Act are vitiated. The assessee company relied upon the following decisions to support its contentions : (i) Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. v. CIT 243 ITR 83(SC) (ii) CIT v. Greenworld Corporation 314 ITR 81(SC) (iii) CIT v. Gabriel India Limited (1993) 203 ITR 0108 (Bom.) 6 Canara Bank Securities Ltd. 6. The CIT held that interest on short term deposit with bank received from investment of surplus funds is to be assessed under the head ‘Income from other sources’ . The CIT relied upon the following decisions: (i) Krishna Polyester Ltd. v. DCIT, 274…

Dev Steel, Navi Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Navi Mumbai

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 3752/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devang Gandhi, Pr. Cit, A/303, Balaji Gardens, Central-4, बनाम/ Sector-11, Koparkhairne, Mumbai Vs. Navi Mumbai-400709 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Abhpg0909N

Section 153ASection 263

…administration. At the same time, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look a…

Dev Steel, Navi Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Navi Mumbai

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 3748/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devang Gandhi, Pr. Cit, A/303, Balaji Gardens, Central-4, बनाम/ Sector-11, Koparkhairne, Mumbai Vs. Navi Mumbai-400709 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Abhpg0909N

Section 153ASection 263

…administration. At the same time, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look a…

Devang Gandhi, Navi Mumbai vs. Pr CIT Cen 4, Mumbai

The appeals are dismissed

ITA 3747/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devang Gandhi, Pr. Cit, A/303, Balaji Gardens, Central-4, बनाम/ Sector-11, Koparkhairne, Mumbai Vs. Navi Mumbai-400709 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Abhpg0909N

Section 153ASection 263

…administration. At the same time, if another view is possible, revision is not permissible. Our view is fortified by the decision from Himachal Pradesh Financial Corp. (186 105)(HP), Bismillah Trading Co. (248 ITR 292)(Ker.) and CIT vs. Green World Corpn. (314 ITR 81)(SC). For invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, the assessment order must contain grievous error which is subversive of the administration of Revenue. Further, exact error must be disclosed by the Commissioner as was held in CIT vs. G.K. Kabra (211 ITR 336)(AP). Section 263 of the Act enables the Commissioner to have a re-look a…