How many judgments cite Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT?

194 judgments on BharatTax cite Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT (321 ITR 92), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 147, Section 144B, Section 148.

Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT

321 ITR 92High Court2010#483 most cited

What is Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

This case clarifies the scope of the Commissioner's revisional powers under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, holding that an assessment order can only be revised if it is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, echoing the principles laid down in Malabar Industrial.

194

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT · Grasim Industries 321 ITR 92 · Section 263 Income Tax Act · revision u/s 263 · erroneous and prejudicial to revenue · scope of revisional powers · inadequate enquiry · non-application of mind · Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. · CIT vs Gabriel India Ltd · assessment order erroneous

Also reported as

188 Taxmann 32723 Taxmann.com 31

Sections most often in play

Section 263 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 147 Section 144B Section 148 Section 10(37)Section 145A(b)

Issues it is cited on

malabar industrial inadequate enquiry revision u/s 263 prejudicial to interest of revenue lack of enquiry revision under section 263 section 263(1)non application of mind assessment order erroneous erroneous and prejudicial income-tax officer section 244a

Judgments citing Grasim Industries Ltd. v. CIT

Jai International, Udaipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 23/JODH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: The Date Of Hearing. 4. That The Hon’Ble Pcit Has Not Given Any Specific Instance About Rejecting The Details Submitted By Us In Response To Their Query. 5. That The Hon’Ble Pcit Has Not Given Any Specific Reason/Speaking Order Contradicting Case Laws Submitted By Us. The Hon’Ble Pcit Only Says That The Facts Are Different.”

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

…icer is unsustainable in law. The said principal has been reiterated by Hon’ble Court in its subsequent judgment titled as CIT V/s Max India Ltd. (295 ITR 282). Similar principal has been followed by jurisdictional High Court in Grasim Industries Ltd V/s CIT (321 ITR 92). Further, an assessment order should not be subject to revision u/s 263 merely because another view is possible on the issue decided by the AO. Following judgements including that of the Supreme Court has decided this issue in favour of Assessee: Supreme Court in the case of Greenworld Corporation – [2009] 181 Taxman 111 (SC) Delhi High Court in…

Shree Laxmi Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax -41, Mumbai

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

ITA 1265/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “G” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 1265/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2018-19) Vs. PCIT-41 Shree Laxmi Enterprises 1107, ATL Corporate Park 541, Kautilya Bhavan Saki Vihar Road, Powai C-41 to C-43, G Block Mumbai-400 072. Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra East PAN : AAZFS1341M Mumbai- 400 051. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri Shashi Bekal Department by Shri Virabhadra S. Mahajan Date of Hearing 19.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 08.08.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this app…

Fdc Limited, Mumbai vs. PCIT, Cir-1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1031/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)Section 37(1)Section 80G

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “F” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 1031/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2018-19) Vs. PCIT, Circle-1 FDC Limited 142-148, Ghaswala Estate Room No. 330 S.V. Road, Jogeshwari 3rd Floor West, Mumbai-400 102. Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road PAN : AAACF0253H Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Dr. K. Shivram, Shri Rahul Hakani & Shri Jay Bansali Department by Shri Ankush Kapoor Date of Hearing 21.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 02.08.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the…

Allied Photographics India Ltd., Mumbai vs. PCIT, Mumbai-1, Mumbai

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

ITA 1083/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shir Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanm/S Alliedphotographics Vs. Pr.Cit-1, India Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Room No.330, Kasturi Buildings, 3Rd Floor, Jamshedji Tata Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, M.K. Road, Mumbai -400020. Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. : Aabca2068A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Mr.Nitish Gandhi.Ar Respondent By : Ms.Smiti Samant. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-1, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Mr.Nitish Gandhi.ARFor Respondent: Ms.Smiti Samant. DR

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 263

…nd accepted the assessee’s submissions in the limited scrutiny in respect of sale of agricultural land and the exemption claimed U/sec10(1) of the act. We rely on the decision of the Honble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/S Grasim Industries Ltd Vs CIT (321 ITR 92) considered the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court on the scope of the revisionary ITA Nos. 1083/Mum/2023 M/s Allied Photographics India Ltd. Mumbai. proceedings initiated under sec263 of the Act and the observations are read as under: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of…

Rajkumar Impex Private Limited, Chennai vs. PCIT - 4, Chenai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 631/CHNY/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2023AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishnan (FCA) &For Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy (CIT) – Ld.DR

Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी महावीर िसंह, उपा12 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ6वाल ,लेखा सद9 के सम2। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA No.631/Chny/2022 (िनधाBरणवषB / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/s. Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Limited PCIT बनाम/ 93/119, 4th floor, St. Mary’s Road, Chennai-4. Vs. Abhiramapuram,Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACR-3577-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Assessee by : Shri B. Ramakrishnan (FCA) & Shri…

Vivek Agnihotri, Mumbai vs. ITO 16 (1)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 4493/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalevivek Agnihotri Vs. Ito – 16(1)(5), 1505/1506, Amarnath Aayakar Bhavan, Tower, Yari Road, M.K.Road, Versova, Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400020. Mumbai – 400061. Pan/Gir No. : Adypa6052B Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.Ar Respondent By : Mr. Ankush Kapoor.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Prcommissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-16, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms.Kinjal Bhuta.ARFor Respondent: Mr. Ankush Kapoor.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 50C

…cquisition where before the AO in the course of hearing and the A.O. has applied the mind and the order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act. 11.We rely on the decision of the Honble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/S Grasim Industries Ltd Vs CIT (321 ITR 92) considered the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court on the scope of the revisionary proceedings initiated under sec263 of the Act and the observations are read as under: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order p…

Sprint Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT- 3 Mumbai, Mumbai

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

ITA 1411/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 68

…nt for examining their credit worthiness. 8. We heard rival contentions and perused the record. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was considered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co Ltd (243 ITR 80). The relevant observations made by Hon’ble Bombay High Court are extracted below: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if…

World Trade Park Limited, Mumbai vs. PCIT - 5, Mumbai

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

ITA 1364/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Baskaran Br & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaleworld Trade Park Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit -5 4Th Floor, Wtp, Jln Room No. 515, 5Th Marg, Jaipur, Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Rajasthan – 302107 Mk Road, Mumbai-400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccr8969E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rajiv Sahai.Ar Respondent By : Shri.Dr.Kishordhule.Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-52, Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sahai.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Dr.KishorDhule.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263Section 271B

…e policy of revenue recoginition as per Accounting Standard (AS)- 9 of ICAI and the method/ basis is accepted by the AO. We rely on the decision of the Honble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/S Grasim Industries Ltd World Trade Park Ltd., Mumbai. Vs CIT (321 ITR 92) considered the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court on the scope of the revisionary proceedings initiated under sec263 of the Act and the observations are read as under: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order p…

Kamalesh Kumar Sheth (HUF), Chennai vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Chennai

In the result, the appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 215/CHNY/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri B.Ramakrishnan, FCA &For Respondent: Shri S.Senthil Kumar, (CIT)-Ld. DR

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

…cer is unsustainable in law. The said principal has been reiterated by Hon’ble Court in its subsequent judgment titled as CIT V/s Max India Ltd. (295 ITR 282). Similar principal has been followed by jurisdictional High Court in Grasim Industries Ltd. V/s CIT (321 ITR 92). Thus, it is clear that an order cannot be termed as "erroneous" unless it is not in accordance with law. 8 If an Income-tax Officer acting in accordance with law makes a certain assessment, the same cannot be branded as "erroneous" by the Commissioner simply because, according to him, the order should have been written differently or more elabo…

Satya Narayan Dhoot, Jodhpur vs. Pr. CIT-1, Jodhpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in respect of above said three issues

ITA 49/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm) I.T.A. No. 49/Jodh/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) Vs. Pcit-1 Satya Narayan Dhoot C/O Rajendra Jain Advocate Jodhpur 106, Akshay Deep Complex 5Th B Road, Sardarpura Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342 001. Pan : Aanpd4945L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain Department By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain Date Of Hearing 03.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 17 .01.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (Am) :-

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Jodhpur Bench Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (JM) I.T.A. No. 49/Jodh/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) Vs. PCIT-1 Satya Narayan Dhoot C/o Rajendra Jain Advocate Jodhpur 106, Akshay Deep Complex 5th B Road, Sardarpura Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342 001. PAN : AANPD4945L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajendra Jain Department by Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain Date of Hearing 03.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement 17 .01.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the revision order dated 29-03-2022 passed by Ld PCIT-1, Jodhpur and it…

Balotra Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd., Balotra, Barmer vs. Pr. CIT-1, Jodhpur

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

ITA 77/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmim/S. Balotra Cooperative Vs The Pr. Cit Marketing Society Ltd. Jodhpur-1 Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaab 0204 C

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

…of the discussions made by him in the impugned revision order. Now the assessee is aggrieved. 6. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was examined by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant observations are extracted below: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in s…

O.S. Motors Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur` vs. Principal Commissioner of Income, Jodhpur

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

ITA 54/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur16 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmim/S. O.S. Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Pr. Cit Sainiks Motor Building, Chopasani Jodhpur-1 Road, Jodhpur-342001 (Raj) Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco 1896 R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194HSection 263Section 36(1)(v)Section 40

…ove said three issues in the light of discussions made by him and also in accordance with law. 3. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was examined by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant observations are extracted below: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in s…

Nisarg Associates, Mumbai vs. PCIT Mumbai-20, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 755/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenisarg Associates V. Ld. Pr.Cit – Mumbai – 20 Room No. 418, Piramal Chambers 1304, Ashok Heights, Near Nicco Circle Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 012 Nikolas Wadi Road, Gundavalli Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400069 Pan: Aahfn4619F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By Shri Ronak G. Doshi & : Shri Chaitanya D. Joshi Department Represented By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ia Ltd (295 ITR 282) (SC) (iii). CIT Vs. Gabriel India Ltd. (203 ITR 108) (Bom HC) (iv). CIT Vs. Grasim Industries Ltd. (2014)(226 Taxman 165)(Bom HC) (v). CIT Vs. LIC Housing Finance Ltd. (2014)(367 ITR458)(Bom HC) (vi). Grasim Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (2010)(321 ITR 92)(Bom HC) 15. Ld. AR contended that both conditions of section 263 i.e. order is 'erroneous’ and 'prejudicial to the interest of revenue' are conjunctive and in support of the above contentions he relied on the following case laws:- (i). CIT Vs. Greenworld Corporation (181 Taxman 111) (SC) (ii). Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (243 ITR 83) (SC…

A.A. Motiwala Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT- 4, Mumbai

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

ITA 1363/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Basakaran & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalm/S. A.A. Motiwala Jewellers Vs. Prin. Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., 31, Kakad Palace, Income Tax-4, Room Shop No.1, Guru Nanak Road, No.629, 6Th Floor, Bandra (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mumbai – 400 050 Road, Mumbai. Pan Aakca6359B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. Bharat KumarFor Respondent: Ms. Mamta Bansal, DR

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘A’ BENCH, MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASAKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. A.A. Motiwala Jewellers Vs. Prin. Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd., 31, Kakad Palace, Income Tax-4, Room Shop No.1, Guru Nanak Road, No.629, 6th Floor, Bandra (West), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mumbai – 400 050 Road, Mumbai. PAN AAKCA6359B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Mr. Bharat Kumar. Respondent By : Ms. Mamta Bansal, DR Date of Hearing : 18.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 O R D E R Per Shri B.R. Baskaran, A.M. : The assessee has filed this a…

Impact Foundation (India), Mumbai vs. The Comm of Income Tax (Exemp), Mumbai

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

ITA 931/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.931/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2017-18) Impact Foundation (India) बिधम/ Cit (E), Mumbai F1, 1St Floor, Laxmi Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, Vs. Wooden Mills, Opp G5A, Mtnl Building, Pedder Shakti Mills Lane, Off, Dr. Road, Dr. Gopalrao E. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi Deshmukh Marg, (W), Mumbai-400011. Cumballa Hill, Mumbai- 400026. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaat1422J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta Revenue By: Shri Purushottam Tripuri (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/01/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit (Exemptions), Mumbai Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Dated 24.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Is Challenging The Validity Of Invocation Of Jurisdiction By Ld Cit(E) U/S 263 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Tripuri (Sr. AR)

Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 263

…A.Y. 2017-18 Impact Foundation (India) 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was examined by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant observations are extracted below: “Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in so…

Pioneer Insurance & Reinsurance Brokers Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 3, Mumbai and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax – 3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 935/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T Varkey (Jm)

Section 131Section 133ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘C’ BENCH, MUMBAI. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Aby T Varkey (JM) I.T.A. No. 933/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2012-13) I.T.A. No. 934/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2013-14) Vs. Prin. CIT-3 and M/s. Pioneer Investcorp Limited 1219, Maker Chamber V DCIT 3(2)(1), Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021. Room No.612, 6th Floor, Aayakar PAN AAACP2423R Bhavan, M K Road Mumbai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 935/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2012-13) Vs. Prin. CIT-3 and M/s. Pioneer Insurance & Reinsurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. DCIT 3(2)(1), 1219, Maker Chamber V Room No.612, 6th Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 0…

Pioneer Investcorp Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 3, Mumbai and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax – 3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 934/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T Varkey (Jm)

Section 131Section 133ASection 263

Pioneer Investcorp Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax - 3, Mumbai and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax – 3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 933/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T Varkey (Jm)

Section 131Section 133ASection 263

Prerak Goel, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -19, Mumbai

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

ITA 787/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)(v)Section 263Section 53ASection 54F

…dingly, the Ld D.R contended that the impugned revision order does not require interference. 8. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was considered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant observations are extracted below: Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in so…

Kaushaliya Devi Dhoot, Jodhpur vs. Pr. CIT-1, Jodhpur

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

ITA 50/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainkaushaliya Devi Dhoot Vs Pr. Cit-1, 0, Lodha Street 1St A Road, Jodhpur Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aanpd 4947 J

Section 263Section 80I

…ported the order passed by Ld PCIT. 6. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record. The scope of revision proceedings initiated under section 263 of the Act was examined by Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. V CIT (321 ITR 92) by taking into account the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The relevant observations are extracted below: Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the Commissioner to call for and examine the record of any proceedings under the Act and, if he considers that any order passed therein, by the Assessing Officer is erroneous in s…