CIT v. Vikas Polymers

341 ITR 537High Court2012#244 most cited

What is CIT v. Vikas Polymers authority for?

An assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial under Section 263 merely because the Assessing Officer did not record an enquiry and its satisfactory answer in the assessment order, provided such an enquiry was conducted. For revision under Section 263, the Commissioner must also provide the assessee an opportunity of being heard and examine their explanation.

318

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Vikas Polymers · Section 263 · erroneous and prejudicial to revenue · inadequate enquiry · lack of enquiry · AO not recording enquiry · opportunity of being heard · revisionary powers · assessment order erroneous · Section 143(3)

Also reported as

194 Taxmann 57244 CTR 380

Sections most often in play

Section 263Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 133(6)Section 1961

Issues it is cited on

inadequate enquirylack of enquiryprejudicial to interest of revenuemalabar industrialrevision u/s 263section 263(1)revision under section 263assessment order erroneouserroneous and prejudicialsection 263section 26principal commissioner of income-tax

Judgments citing CIT v. Vikas Polymers

Building Materials & Technology Promotion Council, New Delhi vs. DCIT(E), Circle- 1(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3846/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: PendingITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Shivam, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

…mind to the issue in question, the ld.. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: 63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held. as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as h…

Sanjay Kumar Daryani, Indore vs. Pr CIT -1, Indore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 563/IND/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjay Kumar Daryani Pr. Cit-1 505, Emerald Court C-Block Indore बनाम/ Sanjana Park Vs. Near Agrawal Public School Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aiopd3135D

Section 143(3)Section 263

…[ITA No.563/Ind/2019] [Shri Sanjay Kumar Daryani, Indore] आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इ"दौर "यायपीठ, इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri Sanjay Kumar Daryani Pr. CIT-1 505, Emerald Court C-Block Indore बनाम/ Sanjana Park Vs. Near Agrawal Public School Indore (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.AIOPD3135D Appellant by Shri Girish Agrawal & Miss Nisha Lahori, A.Rs Respondent by Smt. Ashima Gupta, D.R. Date of Hearing: 09.10.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 24.10.2019 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL…

Blue Star Ltd., Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1941/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri N.S. Jangpangi – Ld. DR
Section 263

…1 Blue Star Ltd Assessment Year :2013-14 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1941/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2013-14 Blue Star Ltd. Pr.CIT-1, 3r d Floor, Room No. 387, Kasturi Building बनाम/ Aaykar Bhavan Mohan T. Advani Chowk Vs. M.K Road, Jamshedji Tata Road Mumbai. Mumbai – 400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACB-4487-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"…

Mrs. Shumana Sen, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3284/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Shumana Sen, AssesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Deepika Mittal, CIT- DR
Section 263

…mind to the issue in question, the ld. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: 63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he…

Mrs. Shumana Sen, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3281/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Shumana Sen, AssesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Deepika Mittal, CIT- DR
Section 263

…mind to the issue in question, the ld. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: 63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he…

Mrs. Shumana Sen, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3283/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Shumana Sen, AssesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Deepika Mittal, CIT- DR
Section 263

…mind to the issue in question, the ld. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: 63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he…

Mrs. Shumana Sen, Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3282/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Oct 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Shumana Sen, AssesseeFor Respondent: Smt. Deepika Mittal, CIT- DR
Section 263

…mind to the issue in question, the ld. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: 63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he…

Latur District Central Co-Op Bnak Ltd, Latur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax -2, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 628/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.165 & 628/Pun/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Latur District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Ldcc Bank Building, 7Th Floor, Yashwantrao Chavan Road, Latur-413 512. Pan : Aaaal0225H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 263

…Assessing Officer and at Pages 23 to 24, the reply was filed by the assessee. 6.1. That further, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vikas A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15 Polymers, 341 ITR 537 (Delhi) wherein it was opined by the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court that “the pre-requisite for the revisionary jurisdiction order u/s.263 of the Act is that Commissioner must give reasons to justify exercise of such power and reasons must also be such as to show that enhancement or modification of assessment or cancellation of assessment or directions…

Latur District Central Co-Op Bank Limited, Latur vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income-Tax-2, Aurangabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 165/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal, Vp & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.165 & 628/Pun/2019 नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Latur District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. Ldcc Bank Building, 7Th Floor, Yashwantrao Chavan Road, Latur-413 512. Pan : Aaaal0225H .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Aurangabad. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 263

…Assessing Officer and at Pages 23 to 24, the reply was filed by the assessee. 6.1. That further, the Ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Vikas A.Ys.2013-14 & 2014-15 Polymers, 341 ITR 537 (Delhi) wherein it was opined by the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court that “the pre-requisite for the revisionary jurisdiction order u/s.263 of the Act is that Commissioner must give reasons to justify exercise of such power and reasons must also be such as to show that enhancement or modification of assessment or cancellation of assessment or directions…

Mahim Patran P. Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT -2, Agra

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 195/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

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

Section 143(3)Section 199(1)Section 205Section 263

…his Court held as under:- 9. The Tribunal further considered the question whether discussion of queries and reply received from assessee, in assessment order, is necessary or not. Relying on two judgments of Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Vikash Polymers [2012] 341 ITR 537/ [2010] 194 Taxman 57 and CIT v. Vodafone Essar South Ltd. [2012] 28 taxmann.com 273/ [2013] 212 Taxman 184 (Delhi), it held that once inquiry was made, a mere non discussion or non- mention thereof in assessment order cannot lead to assumption that Assessing Officer did not apply his mind or that he has not made inquiry on the subject and this w…

Everest Industries Ltd, New Delhi vs. CIT -I, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

ITA 532/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Soumeh Adak &For Respondent: Shri A. Mohan (CIT)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263

…t in case of inadequate inquiry, reliance was placed on the following decisions :- a) CIT vs. Shreepati Holdings & Finance (P.) Ltd. (ITA No. 1879 of 2013) (Bom)(HC). b) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 0167 (Del)(HC) c) CIT vs. Vikas Polymers (2012) 341 ITR 537 (Del) 19 M/s. Everest Industries Ltd. 24. On the other hand, the learned DR appearing for the revenue reiterated the stand of the Commissioner by pointing out that the assessment order has been framed on the aspect of excise duty and sales tax incentives in a routine manner and, therefore, in order to fortify the stand of the revenue, the impugn…

A. Menarini India Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1441/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Aparna Agarwal, CIT-D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 195Section 244ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 40

…t. Last but not the least it was argued that “inadequacy” of inquiry of the AO cannot be considered to be ground for proceedings u/s 263 of the Act by the Revenue authority. Reliance in this regard was placed in the matter of CIT-vs-Vikas Polymers reported in 341 ITR 537 (Delhi). On the other hand, Learned DR relied upon the order passed by the Learned PCIT u/s 263 of the Act. A Menarini India Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT Assessment Year 2011-12 4. Heard the respective parties and perused the relevant materials available on record. It appears from the records that the case of the assessee is this that the service tax calcu…

Small Industries Development Bank of India, Mumbai vs. CIT -3, Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3488/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 263Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 369Section 369(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.3488/Mum/2012 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) I.T.A. No.3290/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2007-08) I.T.A. No.3380/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) I.T.A. No.4111/Mum/2013 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Small Industries Commissioner of Income- Tax-3, Aayakar Bhavan, Development Bank of India, M.K. Road, 4th Floor, Corporate Accounts Mumbai-400020 Department, MSME vs. Development Centre, C-11, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex (East), Mumbai-400051 PAN : AABCS 3480N Appellant…

Goldcity Properties Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 14, Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 2179/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhgoldcity Properties Pvt. Ltd. Principal Commissioner Of [Now Merged With Supergold Vs. Income-Tax -14, R. No. 415, 4Th Floor, Properties Pvt. Ltd.], Shop No.1, Building No.2, Aayakar Bhavan, Sharmik Chs Ltd., Tilak M.K. Road, Nagar, Chembur, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400089. Pan: Aaccg1757H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. P. Daniel (AR)For Respondent: Shri B. Jaya Kumar (CIT-DR)
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 152(2)Section 254(1)Section 263

…- Goldcity Properties Pvt. Ltd. (v) CIT Vs Gabriel India ( 203 ITR 108 Bom), (vi) CIT Vs Development Credit Bank Ltd ( 323 ITR 206 Bom), (vii) CIT Vs Max India (295 ITR 282 SC), (viii) CIT Vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd ( 332 ITR 167 Delhi), (ix) CIT Vs Vikas Polymers (341 ITR 537 Delhi), (x) CIT Vs Arvind Jewellers (259 ITR 502 Guj), (xi) Malabar Industrial Company Vs CIT (243 ITR 83 SC), (xii) Mehta Trading Vs CIT ( ITA No. 2838/M/2013 dated 31.10.2014, (xiii) PCIT Vs Ginger Properties (P) Ltd. (396 ITR 496 Guj), (xiv) Pyre Lal Jaiswal Vs CIT (146 ITD 555 Allahabad), (xv) Rashtriya Chemical & Fertilizers Vs CIT ( ITA No.…

Amit Agarwal, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 28, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 4050/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Manish Shah and Ms. Niyanta Mehta-Ld. ArsFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma-Ld.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4050/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Amit Agarwal Pr. CIT-28 बनाम/ C-607, Palm Beach Residency Tower No.06, Vashi Sector-04, Nerul Navi Mumbai-400 703. Vs. Navi Mumbai-400 706. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABPA-3472-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee by : Shri Manish Shah and Ms. Niyanta Mehta-Ld. Ars Revenue by : Shri Anadi…

Amazia Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT-1, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2499/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta with Anuj Kushandwala –CA’s (AR)For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena CIT-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 22Section 253Section 254(1)Section 263

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Amazia Developers Pvt. DCIT- Circle 1(1)(1) Room No. 533, 5th Ltd. 108, G- Wing, Akruti Commercial Complex, Next Vs. Floor, Aayakar to Akruti Centre Point, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Central Road, Andheri Churchgate, (East) Mumbai-400067. Mumbai-400020. PAN: AACHCA6934H Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Vijay Mehta with Anuj Kushandwala –CA’s (AR) Respondent by : Shri R.P. Meena CIT-DR & M.K. Singh (Sr DR) Date of Hearing : 30.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 ORDER…

M/S. Conton Textiles Mills Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT- 9, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2742/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2019AY 2010-11
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘B’, New Delhi Before: Shri Amit Shukla, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2010-11 Conton Textiles Mills Pvt. Ltd., vs. Principal C.I.T. – 9, (Now known as VNG Packaging New Delhi Pvt. Ltd.), 206, Vardhman Shrenik Plaza, LSP, Mayur Vihar, Phase-II, New Delhi. PAN: AACCC9563D (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Raj Kumar, C.A. and Sh. Rajeev Ahuja, C.A. Respondent Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, by CIT/DR Date of Hearing 27.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement 08.04.2019 ORDER Per Amit Shukla, J.M.: The aforesaid appeal has been fil…

Philips India Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT-IV, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1142/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1142/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Philips India Limited..........……………………………………....………………..…………………….….Appellant Earlier Known As Philips Electronics India Limited 7 No. Justice Chandra Madhab Road Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aabcp 9487 A] Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv, Kolkata…….............…....................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri P.J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate & Shri Navneet Misra, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 27Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…or fresh examination without commenting or specifying as to how the order passed by the Assessing Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue:-  CIT v. Gabriel India Limited (1993) 203 ITR 108 (Bombay)  CIT vs. Vikas Polymers (2010) 341 ITR 537 (Delhi)  CIT vs. R.K. Metal Works (1978) 112 ITR 445 (P&H) 5.7. On the issue of excess depreciation, the ld. Sr. Advocate submitted that the assessee company is engaged in the manufacture of consumer lifestyle products and lighting products interalia through co-makers. Moulds were used by the company for manufacturing of plastic products which f…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1764/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…to the issue in question, the ld. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. 70. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: “63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he…

Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs. Prcit-16, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1763/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2013-14] & [A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Sr Adv
Section 263

…to the issue in question, the ld. CIT cannot invoke section 263 of the Act merely because he has different opinion. 70. Relevant observation of the High Court reads as under: “63. We find the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vikas Polymer reported in 341 ITR 537 has held as under: “We are thus of the opinion that the provisions of s. 263 of the Act, when read as a composite whole make it incumbent upon the CIT before exercising revisional powers to : (i) call for and examine the record, and (ii) give the assessee an opportunity of being heard and thereafter to make or cause to be made such enquiry as he…