CIT v. Premier Industries

243 ITR 283Supreme Court of India2000#24043 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Premier Industries

PANACHE DEALTRADE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. P.C.I.T., CENTRAL - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 977/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Nov 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 977/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Panache Dealtrade Pvt. Limited,…….………Appellant 1St Floor, Rup Chand Roy Street, Kolkata-700007, West Bengal [Pan:Aagcp0699B] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Kolkata-2,………………………………..………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Subhendu Datta, Cit(D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 24, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 18, 2024 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 151Section 263Section 263(1)

…47/144 of the Act is neither erroneous nor prejudicial devoid of which the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act cannot be invoked. The case of the assessee is supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Malabar Industries Limited reported in 243 ITR 283, wherein it has been held that in order to invoke jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act, the assessment order passed has to be erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of revenue and even if one of the two conditions are satisfied, even then section 263 by ld. PCIT cannot be invoked. 11. Considering the above facts and circumstances,…

CIT v. Premier Industries (243 ITR 283) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax