CIT v. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd.

30 DTR 231High Court2009#6628 most cited

What is CIT v. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd. authority for?

The Commissioner of Income-tax cannot exercise revisionary powers under section 263 if the assessment order was passed after considering all relevant facts and the assessee provided proper explanations and confirmations. The Tribunal can set aside an order invoking section 263 if it proceeds on an erroneous assumption.

17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Unique Autofelts · section 263 · revisionary powers · erroneous assumption · proper explanation · confirmations · Tribunal set aside order · prejudicial to interest of revenue · inadequate enquiry

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

prejudicial to interest of revenueinadequate enquirymalabar industrialerroneous and prejudicialincome-tax officersection 263section 26scrutiny assessmentsection 143personcompanysection 14

Judgments citing CIT v. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd.

Bhandari Associates, Pune vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax 2, Pune

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

ITA 1227/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora and Ms. Sampada S IngaleFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ITO at the time of passing of the assessment order, but would include the records available with the CIT at the time of passing of the order by the CIT.” 30. We find Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Unique Autofelts (P.) Ltd. (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) has observed as under: “From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under s. 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an AO was erroneous. While exercising such power, the CIT wa…

Alliance Nirmaan Limited, Bareilly vs. PCIT, Bareilly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 119/LKW/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 143(3)Section 263

…y him is a finding of fact and on the basis of which the jurisdiction is seen by the Commissioner of income tax being non-existent must be held to be not sustainable. Consequently, the appeal fails and is here by dismissed." CIT v. Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd., (30 DTR 231) (P&H); "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held power under section 263 of Income Tax Act could be exercised where view taken by an assessing officer was erroneous. While exercising such power, the co…

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

…y him is a finding of fact and on the basis of which the jurisdiction is seen by the Commissioner of income tax being non-existent must be held to be not sustainable. Consequently, the appeal fails and is here by dismissed.” CIT v. Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd., (30 DTR 231) (P&H); “5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held power under section 263 of Income Tax Act could be exercised where view taken by an assessing officer was erroneous. While exercising such power, the co…

Smt. Paramjit Kaur, Ludhiana vs. Pr.CIT-2, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 337/CHANDI/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 337/Chd/2020 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2011-12 Smt. Paramjit Kaur, बनाम The Pcit- 2, H.No.7227/3, St. No. 18, Daba Ludhiana Road, New Janta Nagar, Ludhiana 141003 "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Agwpk2730M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

…also conscious of the landmark judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CITR (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC) and also the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd. (2009) 30 DTR 231, in which , it has been held as under:- “5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under section 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an Assessing Officer was erroneous. While e…

Ganga Acrowools Limited, Ludhiana vs. Pr, CIT-1, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 196/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.196/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…t order was erroneous and he should not have simply set aside the order passed by the AO directing him to conduct the further enquiries. 6.8 On identical issue, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) held as under: "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under Section 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an Assessing Officer was erroneous. While exercising such…

Sh. Daljit Singh Bassi, Ranjit Nagar vs. Pr.CIT-1, Chandigarh

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 56/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 56/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Nangia, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 54BSection 54F

…order was erroneous and he should not have simply set aside the order passed by the AO directing him to conduct the further enquiries. 6.7 On identical issue, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) held as under: "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under Section 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an Assessing Officer was erroneous. While exercising ITA…

Tarun Jain, Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

ITA 144/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

…rders were erroneous and he should not have simply set aside the orders passed by the AO directing him to conduct the further enquiries. 9.5 On identical issue, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) held as under: "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under Section 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an Assessing Officer was erroneous. While exercising such…

M/S Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Pvt. Ltd.., Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 143/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.143/Chd/2021 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., The Pcit, बनाम 18-A, 2Nd Floor, (Central) North Avenue Road, Ludhiana West Punjab Bagh, New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

…t order was erroneous and he should not have simply set aside the order passed by the AO directing him to conduct the further enquiries. 5.5 On identical issue, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) held as under: "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the ITA No. 143-Chd-2021 Royal Lifestyle Jewellers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi 14 Tribunal rightly held that power under Section 263 of the Act could be exercised where vie…

Rajni Jain, Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

ITA 142/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

…rders were erroneous and he should not have simply set aside the orders passed by the AO directing him to conduct the further enquiries. 9.5 On identical issue, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) held as under: "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under Section 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an Assessing Officer was erroneous. While exercising such…

Shri Sanjay Jain, Bathinda vs. Pr.CIT(Central), Ludhiana

ITA 140/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Sarabjeet Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

…rders were erroneous and he should not have simply set aside the orders passed by the AO directing him to conduct the further enquiries. 9.5 On identical issue, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd (2009) 30 DTR 231 (P&H) held as under: "5. From the finding of the Tribunal, it is clear that the assessee had given proper explanation by filing the necessary confirmations. In view of such a finding, the Tribunal rightly held that power under Section 263 of the Act could be exercised where view taken by an Assessing Officer was erroneous. While exercising such…

M/S Active Tools (P). Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -II, Jalandhar

ITA 260/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 115Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 154Section 68Section 69Section 69ASection 69BSection 69CSection 69D

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar Before : Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Accountant Member ITA Nos.260/Amr/2019 Assessment Year2014-15 V.S. DCIT Circle – II M/s. Active Tools P. Ltd. 79, New Udyog Nagar Fazilpur Randhawa Masanda, Jhalandhar Jhalandhar (Punjab) PAN:AAECA6485E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Surindra Mahajan, C.A. Respondent by Smt. Jatindra Kaur, D.R. Date of Hearing 14.07.2021 16.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. 1. That the present appeal was filed by the Assessee,feeling aggrieved by the order pas…

Nuwave Esolutions Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3231/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamblenuwave Esolutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Cit(A) 3Rd Floor, District Centre, Delhi-V Dda Building, Nehru Place New Delhi New Delhi Aabcn5790Q (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 10Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 40Section 92

…Automation Engineers (Bombay) (P) Ltd. 13 DTR 145 (Bom) viii. Ms. Mayawati Vs. CIT(A) 18 DTR 46 (TRB, 2009) ix. Rajiv Agnihotri Vs. CIT(A) 23 DTR 476 (Del) Trib. x. Kulbir Singh Vs. Asst. CIT(A) 24 DTR 421 (Agra) Trib. xi. CIT(A) Vs. Unique Autofelts (P) Ltd. 30 DTR 231 (P & H). xii. CIT(A) Vs. Deepak Mittal 37 DTR 8 ( P & H), 2010) 37 DTR (P & H) 8 xiii. Double Dot Finance Ltd. Vs. Asstt. CIT(A) 38 DTR 220 (Mumbai) xiv CIT(A) vs. Hindustan Marketing and Advertising Co. Ltd. 46 DTR 109 (Del.) xv. Raj Shyama Construction (P) Ltd. Vs. Asstt. CIT 135 TTJ 33 (Del.) xvi. CIT(A) vs. Hero Auto Ltd. 343 ITR 342 (Del.) xv…

Surya Merchants Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, Kanpur

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3136/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

…tional pre-conditions for invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 are absent and thus the impugned order is liable to be cancelled and relied upon the following case laws:- a. CIT vs. Kanda Rice Mills 178 ITR 446 (P & H) b. CIT vs. Unique Auto Belts (P) Ltd. 30 DTR 231 (P&H) 6.2 It was further stated that suppression of sales unearthed during search and seizure operations can be calculated only to the extent of the seized material and relied upon the following case laws:- a. Fort Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 145 TTJ 0340 ITA NOS. 3132-3136/Del/2014 (Kolkata Tribunal) b. J.B Education Society vs. ACIT (…

Surya Merchants Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, Kanpur

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3135/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

…tional pre-conditions for invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 are absent and thus the impugned order is liable to be cancelled and relied upon the following case laws:- a. CIT vs. Kanda Rice Mills 178 ITR 446 (P & H) b. CIT vs. Unique Auto Belts (P) Ltd. 30 DTR 231 (P&H) 6.2 It was further stated that suppression of sales unearthed during search and seizure operations can be calculated only to the extent of the seized material and relied upon the following case laws:- a. Fort Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 145 TTJ 0340 ITA NOS. 3132-3136/Del/2014 (Kolkata Tribunal) b. J.B Education Society vs. ACIT (…

Surya Merchants Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, Kanpur

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3134/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

…tional pre-conditions for invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 are absent and thus the impugned order is liable to be cancelled and relied upon the following case laws:- a. CIT vs. Kanda Rice Mills 178 ITR 446 (P & H) b. CIT vs. Unique Auto Belts (P) Ltd. 30 DTR 231 (P&H) 6.2 It was further stated that suppression of sales unearthed during search and seizure operations can be calculated only to the extent of the seized material and relied upon the following case laws:- a. Fort Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 145 TTJ 0340 ITA NOS. 3132-3136/Del/2014 (Kolkata Tribunal) b. J.B Education Society vs. ACIT (…

Surya Merchants Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, Kanpur

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3133/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

…tional pre-conditions for invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 are absent and thus the impugned order is liable to be cancelled and relied upon the following case laws:- a. CIT vs. Kanda Rice Mills 178 ITR 446 (P & H) b. CIT vs. Unique Auto Belts (P) Ltd. 30 DTR 231 (P&H) 6.2 It was further stated that suppression of sales unearthed during search and seizure operations can be calculated only to the extent of the seized material and relied upon the following case laws:- a. Fort Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 145 TTJ 0340 ITA NOS. 3132-3136/Del/2014 (Kolkata Tribunal) b. J.B Education Society vs. ACIT (…

Surya Merchants Ltd., New Delhi vs. CIT, Kanpur

In the result, all the five Appeals filed by the Assessee stand

ITA 3132/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Sunita Kejriwal, CIT(DR)
Section 153ASection 263Section 40A(3)Section 80I

…tional pre-conditions for invoking revision jurisdiction u/s 263 are absent and thus the impugned order is liable to be cancelled and relied upon the following case laws:- a. CIT vs. Kanda Rice Mills 178 ITR 446 (P & H) b. CIT vs. Unique Auto Belts (P) Ltd. 30 DTR 231 (P&H) 6.2 It was further stated that suppression of sales unearthed during search and seizure operations can be calculated only to the extent of the seized material and relied upon the following case laws:- a. Fort Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2012) 145 TTJ 0340 ITA NOS. 3132-3136/Del/2014 (Kolkata Tribunal) b. J.B Education Society vs. ACIT (…