What is CIT v. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. authority for?

An assessment order is not "erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue" under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer conducted appropriate inquiries and applied their mind, as evidenced by assessment records and order sheets. The question of non-application of mind is a factual one, with a legal presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act.

How many judgments cite CIT v. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd.?

124 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (366 ITR 593), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 263, Section 142(1), Section 1961, Section 115BBE, Section 144B.

CIT v. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (366 ITR 593)

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

…-vis that 0 the Commissioner cannot render an order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest o the revenue. The aforesaid position gets further strength from the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 593 (Cal), the relevant finding of which is applicable to the facts of the present assessee are given below: "85. Whether the assessment order dated March 28, 2008, was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records of…

M/S Model Exim, Kanpur vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Kanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 137/LKW/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriam/S. Model Exim Pcit (Central) V. 624-C, Defence Colony, 7/81-B, Tilak Nagar, Jajmau, Kanpur-208010. Kanpur. Pan:Aadfm6163H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Smt Namita S. Pandey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 29 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Smt Namita S. Pandey, CIT(DR)

Section 139Section 153CSection 153DSection 263Section 263(1)

…be termed as erroneous for usurpation of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. For better understanding of this aspect, we can take help of the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs J.L. Morrison (I) Ltd Page 20 of 24 (366 ITR 593), wherein their Lordships explained the difference between the two as follows:- "86. Whether the assessment order dated 28th March, 2008 was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records of the assessment including…

Britannia Industries Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 462/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 35(1)(i)Section 43BSection 56(2)(x)Section 80J

…facts had taken a plausible and correct view accepting the transactions entered into by the assessee. In support of his argument, ld. Counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Morrison & Co. Limited reported in 366 ITR 593, wherein the Hon’ble Court has held that where the assessee’s claim is allowed by the ld. Assessing Officer after conducting necessary enquiry and application of mind, then the order of assessment cannot be considered and held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue under section 263 of the Act on the ground of lack of enquiry…

M/S Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT-4, Kolkata

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1004/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1004/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited Pr. Commissioner of Income 86C, Vishwakarma Vs Tax -4, Kolkata Topsia Road (South) Topsia Kolkata - 700046 [PAN: AAACS1425L] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, A/R Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Dat…

Shri Leelahar Palasiyawala, Indore vs. The ITO 4(4), Indore

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 346/IND/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Leeladhar Palasiyawala, Pr.Cit-1, Village Kalariya, Post Indore बनाम/ Kalariya, Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Bqdppo511K Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal, Ca & Shri N. D. Patwa, Adv. Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.10.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 19.12.2023

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर "ायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Leeladhar Palasiyawala, Pr.CIT-1, Village Kalariya, Post Indore बनाम/ Kalariya, Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) PAN: BQDPPO511K Assessee by Shri Ashish Goyal, CA and Shri N. D. Patwa, Adv. Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement 19.12.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by revision-order dated 17.03.2021 passe…

Harmony Yarns Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Surat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 348/SRT/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat23 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.348/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Harmony Yarns Private Vs. The Pcit-1, Limited, Surat Plot-65, 1St Floor Subhash Nagar Society, Ghod Dod Road, Nr. Ram Chowk, Surat – 395001. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach5895F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Airiju Jaikaran, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/10/2023 23/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

…he Commissioner, cannot render an order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.” 23. The aforesaid position gets further strength from the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 593 (Cal), the relevant finding of which is applicable to the facts of the present assessee is quoted below : “85. Whether the assessment order dated March 28, 2008, was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records of…

Shri Champakbhai D. Patel, Bardoli vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (It & Tp), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 15/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.15/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) M/S. Champakbhai D. Patel, Vs. The Cit(It & Tp), Mota Sardar Chowk, Bardoli, Ahmedabad Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Atlpp0997K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Shri S. M. Keshkamat, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Date Of Hearing 13/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25/09/2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…a-vis that of the Commissioner, cannot render an order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.” 19. The aforesaid position gets further strength from the decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 593 (Cal), the relevant finding of which is applicable to the facts of the present assessee is quoted below : “85. Whether the assessment order dated March 28, 2008, was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records o…

Totgars Co-Operative Sale Society Ltd, Sirsi vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubballi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 168/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Bhoomija Verma, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2017-18 The Totgars’ Co-operative Sale Vs. The Principal Commissioner Society Ltd., of Income Tax, APMC Yard, Sirsi – 581 402. Hubli. Uttara Kannada District. PAN: AACAT 0251D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan & Ms. Bhoomija Verma, Advocates. Respondent by : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 01.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 12.06.2023 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member T…

Garud Credit & Holding Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1270/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 35DSection 68

…ate vs. ITO 1504 (Pune) "A" BENCH Argument:- If AO adopts plausible view then usurpation of jurisdiction u/s 263 is bad in law Malabar Industrial (2000) 243 ITR 83 The Hon’ble Supreme 372 – 377 Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (SC) Court of India CIT vs. J.L. Morrison (2014) 366 ITR 593 The Hon’ble High Court 378 – 405 (India) Limited (Cal) of Calcutta Commissioner of (2007) 213 CTR The Hon’ble Supreme 406 – 407 Income Tax Vs. Max 0266 (SC) Court of India India Ltd. Commissioner of (2017) 390 ITR 0292 The Hon’ble High Court 408 – 414 Income Tax Vs. of Bombay Nirav Modi Hill Queen (2021) 189 ITD 139 The Hon’ble High Court 415 – 4…

Kanaiya Readymade Stores, Surat vs. Pr. CIT-1, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 61/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.61/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Kanaiya Readymade Stores, The Pcit-1, Surat. Vs. 3/199-200, Main Bazar, Opp. Laliya Lake, Olpad, Surat – 394540. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aalfk1700E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca Respondent By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17/04/2023

Section 143(3)Section 263

…he Commissioner, cannot render an order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.” 15. The aforesaid position gets further strength from the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 593 (Cal), the relevant finding of which is applicable to the facts of the present assessee is quoted below : “85. Whether the assessment order dated March 28, 2008, was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records of…

Nya International, Surat vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 57/SRT/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.57/Srt/2022 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2012-13) (Physical Court Hearing) Nya International, Vs. The Pcit-1, Unit No.360, Plot No.239, Sez, Gidc Surat. Sachin, Suarat – 394230. (Assessee) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aahfn1681M

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…did not reach the right conclusions as a result of his enquiry, the impugned revision order is indeed unsustainable in law. It is not a case in which adequate enquiries has not been carried out.” [Emphasis given] (2) CIT vs. J.L. Morrison (India) Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 593 (Cal) “85. Whether the assessment order dated March 28, 2008, was passed without application of mind is basically a question of fact. The learned Tribunal has held that the assessment order was not passed without application of mind. The records of the assessment including the order-sheets go to show that appropriate enquiry was made and the Asse…