M.S. Raju v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/

298 ITR 373Reported decision#10482 most cited

What is M.S. Raju v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/ authority for?

The word 'record' when used in relation to revisionary powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is not restricted to material available before the Assessing Officer, but can include material obtained subsequently. This distinguishes it from revisionary powers under Section 264, which may have a narrower scope.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Also referred to as

M.S. Raju v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax · 298 ITR 373 · section 263 · section 264 · revisionary powers · interests of revenue · record · material obtained subsequently

Sections most often in play

Section 153CSection 153ASection 143(3)Section 132Section 147Section 132(4)Section 131(1A)Section 143(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 158bb(1)retraction of statementsection 158bbsection 131(1a)section 153c(1)section 292bsection 34block periodsection 153badmission of additional evidencesection 132(1)section 158b

Judgments citing M.S. Raju v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/

John Distilleries Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 987/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

John Distilleries Pvt Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

ITA 986/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri T.M. Shivakumar, Sr. A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

…. CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

John Developers, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 847/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

John Developers, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

ITA 846/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

…. CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

John Developers, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 845/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 841/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 840/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 839/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

M/S. Paul Resorts & Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 838/BANG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

…CIT, the Division Bench of this Court has observed at Paragraph Nos.9 & 13 as follows: Mr. Swaminathan would refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M.S. Raju Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/2007 : 298 ITR 373) which has expressed a view to the effect that the import of the word 'record' as set out in the Circular (supra) would be restricted to the power under section 263 only and not section 264. The distinction noted by the Division Bench in that case was that the power of revision under section 263 of the Act was intended to be exercised in cases wh…

Hindustan Shipyard Ltd, Visakhapatnam vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 451/VIZ/2017[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jan 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.451/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S Hindustan Shipyard Ltd., Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Gandhigram Income Tax Visakhapatnam Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaach4275P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 18.01.2019 01.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR

…further observed that the income has to be computed each year independently and every year is an independent unit and expenditure relatable to the earlier years cannot be debited in the subsequent years. Therefore, following the decision of M.S. Raju Vs. DCIT 298 ITR 373 (Andhra Pradesh) and Cairn Energy India Ltd. Vs. JCIT 297 ITR 59 (Mad), the AO held that the prior period adjustments claimed by the assessee in the year under consideration is disallowable, accordingly disallowed the expenditure of Rs.3,45,98,000/- and added back to the income. The AO also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High C…

M.S. Raju v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (MANU/AP/0956/ (298 ITR 373) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax