How many judgments cite Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (AP)?

73 judgments on BharatTax cite Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (AP) (354 ITR 35), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (AP) come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 263, Section 143(3), Section 144B, Section 142(1), Section 115BBE, Section 133A.

Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (AP)

354 ITR 35High Court2013#1553 most cited

What is Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (AP) authority for?

The Commissioner can exercise revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act only if the Assessing Officer's order is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, requiring satisfaction of these twin conditions.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Spectra Shares and Scrips · Section 263 · revisionary powers · Commissioner · CIT · erroneous and prejudicial · twin conditions · lack of enquiry · inadequate enquiry · non-application of mind · Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. · Section 143(3)

Sections most often in play

Section 263 Section 143(3)Section 144B Section 142(1)Section 115BBE Section 133A Section 147 Section 154

Issues it is cited on

inadequate enquiry lack of enquiry section 263(1)malabar industrial revision under section 263 erroneous and prejudicial non-application of mind section 119 section 263 section 26 profits and gains of business or profession complete scrutiny

Judgments citing Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (AP)

PENNAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1),, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is partly allowed/partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 832/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)Section 263

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मधुसूदन साव"डया, माननीय लेखा सद"य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.832/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2020-21) PENNAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED, VS. DCIT, Hyderabad. Circle-5(1), PAN: AABCP3074H Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate Assessee Represented by राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR Department Represented by…

STUDDS ACCESSORIES LIMITED,FARIDABAD vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, FARIDABAD, FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3570/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalkra, Adv &For Respondent: Sh. Avikal Manu, CIT DR

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263Section 80J

…proceedings cannot be initiated with a view to start fishing and roving inquiries [refer Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. vs ITO [1977] 106 ITR 1 (SC), CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd.: [1993] 203 ITR 108 (Bombay), Spectra Shares & Scrips (P.) Ltd. vs CIT: [2013] 354 ITR 35 (Andhra Pradesh), Narayan Tatu Rane vs ITO (supra)]. c) Moreover, it is pertinent to note that in the impugned order passed under section 263 of the Act, the PCIT has not rendered any specific or speaking finding on the allegation of addition in relation to deduction under section 80JJAA of the Act (INR 56,44,273) and CSR expenses (INR 1,01,00,00…

M/S. HYUNDAI MOTOR INDIA LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. PCIT-4, , CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 434/CHNY/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Sriram Seshadri, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, C.I.T

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 263Section 43(1)

…wality Steel Suppliers SC 395 ITR 1 6 Complex Virtusa Consulting Services (P.) 35 HC – Madras 442 ITR 385 Ltd. 332 ITR 167 67 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. HC-Delhi Clix Finance India (P.) Ltd HC – Delhi 298 Taxman 217 78 Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) Ltd. HC-Andra Pradesh 354 ITR 35 89 113 Chemsworth (P.) Ltd. HC – Karnataka 119 taxmann.com 358 133 Shriram Properties Limited ITAT – Chennai 2023 (4) TMI 375 124 Thanthi Trust ITAT – Chennai 171 taxmann.com 470 154 Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Limited ITAT – Chennai 2023 (6) TMI 812 Keller (M) SDN BHD ITAT – Chennai ITA 1319/CHNY/2023 163 Menzies Bobba Ground ITAT – Hyderabad ITA No. 226…

WORLDVIEW EDUCATION SERVICES PRIVATE LMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-17(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1056/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1056/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Worldview Education Services Private Limited, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad – 500 016. Ward-17(1), Telangana. Hyderabad. Pan Aaacw9480F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca C. Maheshwar Reddy राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: G Saratha, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA C. Maheshwar ReddyFor Respondent: G Saratha, Sr. AR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37

…se to the show cause notice issued u/sec.142(1) of the Act, then, it is not necessary for the Assessing Officer to give an elaborate finding on the issue. The Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd., vs. CIT [2013] 354 ITR 35 (AP) has held in Paras- 31 to 34 as under : “31. From the above decisions, the following principles as to exercise of jurisdiction by the Commissioner u/s.263 of the Act can be culled out : 24 ITA.No.1056/Hyd./2025 (a) The Commissioner has to be satisfied of twin conditions, namely, (i) the order of the Assessing Officer sought to be revised i…

AKASHDEEP CLOTH CENTRE,KANNAD vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 959/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: S/Shri Shubham N. Rathi and Ashutosh DhootFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69Section 69B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2019-20 Akashdeep Cloth Centre PCIT, Nashik C/o Akashdeep Cloth Centre, Bus Vs. Stand Road, Aurangabad – 431103 PAN: AAJFA3719R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment year : 2019-20 Manmandir Cloth Centre PCIT, Nashik C/o Manmandir Cloth Centre, Vs. Bazaar Peth, Tal Kannad, Aurangabad – 431103 PAN: AAJFM6647G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : S/Shri Shubham N. Rathi and Ashutosh Dhoot Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 29-10-20…

MANMANDIR CLOTH CENTRE,KANNAD vs. PCIT, NASHIK

In the result, both the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

ITA 1012/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: S/Shri Shubham N. Rathi and Ashutosh DhootFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 69Section 69B

AP POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,VIJAYAWADA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 298/VIZ/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.298/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessme298Nt Year: 2021-22) Andhra Pradesh Pollution Vs. Dy. Cit Control Board, (Exemption Circle) Vijayawada Vijayawada Pan:Aaaja1610Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Satyanarayana Murthy, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 30/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 06/08/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Revision Order Dated 11/03/2025 Of The Learned Cit (Exemptions), Passed U/S 263 Of The Act For The A.Y.2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayana Murthy, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)

Section 10Section 10(46)Section 11(2)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…Act is also exempted from tax. In support of his contention, the learned Counsel for the assessee has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Spectra Shares & Scrips (P.) Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income-tax reported in 354 ITR 35 dated, 21st February, 2013. Page 5 of 18 ITA No 298 of 2025 AP Pollution Control Board Vijayawada 4. On the other hand, the learned DR has submitted that the assessee has not disputed the fact that there was an accumulation of income during the financial year 2015-16, out of which a sum of Rs.3,86,62,546/- remained unutilized even after the expi…

THE CITIZEN CO-OP-SOCIETY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 388/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.388/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) The Citizen Cooperative Vs. Dy.Cit Society Limited, Hyderabad Circle 9 (1) Pan:Aaaat3952F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Narender Kumar Naik, Cit (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Revision Order Dated 13/02/2025 Of The Learned Pr. Cit Passed U/S 263 Of The Act For The A.Y.2020-21. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit) - Iv U/S 263 Of The Act Is Erroneous Both In Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pcit) U/S 263 Of The Act Is Bad In Law & Need To Be Quashed.

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Narender Kumar Naik, CIT (DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P

…the same issue which were already decided by the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the following decisions: i) Hon'ble A.P High Court in the case of Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) Ltd vs. CIT (354 ITR 35) A.P ii) Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vijay Kumar Koganti (275 Taxman 394 (Mad). iii) Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Kansara Poptlal Tribhuvan Metal (P) Ltd (156 Taxmann.com 433) (Guj.) iv) Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Clix Finance India (P) Ltd (160 Taxmann.com 357)(Del.) v) Hon'ble…

CT. RAMANATHAN (HUF),PUDUKKOTTAI vs. PCIT 1, MADURAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 761/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.761/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2020-21 C.T.Ramanathan(Huf), Income Tax Officer, No.7/45, Ct.Rm.S.House, M.St.S. Street Ward-1, Kulipirai, Pudukottai Dist, Pudukottai. Tamil Nadu-622 402. [Pan: Aaahc0701L] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mr.V.Subbarayan, Dcit(Retd.) प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Mr.M.K.Biju, Cir Dr By Virtual. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr.V.Subbarayan, DCIT(Retd.)For Respondent: Mr.M.K.Biju, CIR DR by virtual

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 3

…ces HC-Madras 442 ITR 385 (P.) Ltd. Globus Infocom Ltd. HC-Delhi 369 ITR 14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. HC-Delhi 332 ITR 167 Mohak Real Estate (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 161 taxmann.com 388 Clix Finance India (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 298 Taxman 217 Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) HC-Andra 354 ITR 35 Ltd. Pradesh Chemsworth (P.) Ltd. HC-Karnataka 119 taxmann.com 358 Shriram Properties Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (4) TMI 375 Cavinkare (P.) Ltd. ITAT-Chennai 149 taxmann.com 296 Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (6) TMI 812 FCA Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. ITAT-Chennai ITΑ 684/CHNY/2023 Keller (M) SDN BHD ITAT-Chennai ITA 1319/CHNY/2023…

SITA RAMA RAJU SAGI,BHIMAVARAM vs. ITO WARD 1 BHIMAVARAM, BHIMAVARAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam20 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.154/Viz/2025 (धनिाारण िर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21) Sita Rama Raju Sagi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhimavaram – 534202. Ward-1, Pan: Egapa3925J Bhimavaram. (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Mrs. Hema Latha K, Ca प्रत्यार्थी की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : 20/05/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Mrs. Hema Latha K, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44A

…8 (Bom.) (3) GVR Associates vs. ITO in ITA No. 221/Viz/2015 (4) M/s. Nue-Tech Engineers vs. CIT-1, Visakhapatnam in ITO No. 570/Viz/2013 (5) Supreme Court [2000] 109 taxman 66 (SC) (6) Andhra Pradesh High Court in Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) Ltd vs. CIT (AP) 354 ITR 35 (7) Visakhapatnam Tribunal in ITA No. 81/Vizag/2016 (8) Delhi Tribunal [2019] taxmann.com 92 (Delhi Tribunal) (9) Andhra Pradesh High Court in ITTA No. 512 of 2011 & 177 of 2012 10) Allahabad High Court in [2019] 110 taxmann.com 170 (Allahabad) 11) Allahabad High Court in [2015] 60 taxmann.com 243 (Allahabad) 12) Visakhapatnam Tribunal in ITA No.…

FAIVELEY TRANSPORT TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,HOSUR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1598/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…P.) HC-Madras 442 ITR 385 Ltd. Globus Infocom Ltd. HC-Delhi 369 ITR 14 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. HC-Delhi 332 ITR 167 Mohak Real Estate (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 161 taxmann.com 388 Clix Finance India (P.) Ltd HC-Delhi 298 Taxman 217 Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) Ltd. HC-Andra 354 ITR 35 Pradesh Chemsworth (P.) Ltd. HC-Karnataka 119 taxmann.com 358 ITA No.1598 /Chny/2024 Shriram Properties Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (4) TMI 375 Cavinkare (P.) Ltd. ITAT-Chennai 149 taxmann.com 296 Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (6) TMI 812 FCA Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. ITAT-Chennai ITΑ 684/CHNY/2023 Keller (M) SDN BHD ITAT-Chenna…

MENZIES BOBBA GROUND HANDLING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED (NOW MERGED WITH MENZIES AVIATION BOBBA(BANGALORE)PRIVATE LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. DCIT CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 226/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Sriram Seshadri, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR appeared for Shri Kumar Pranav, CIT -DR

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.226/Hyd/2021 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Menzies Bobba Ground Dy.Commissioner of Handling Services Private Vs. Income Tax, Ltd (now merged with Circle-5(1) Menzies Aviation Bobba Hyderabad (Bangalore) Pvt.Ltd.) [PAN : AAFCM0724P] अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent धििााररती द्वारा/Assessee by: Shri Sriram Seshadri, AR राजस्‍व द्वारा/Revenue by: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR appe…

KELLER (M) SDN BHD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1319/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1319/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Keller (M) Sdn Bhd, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, Centennial Square, International Taxation 1(2) No.6A, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [Pan: Aagck 8014M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Ashik Shah, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT

Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 239Section 263

…e Court 295 ITR 282 3 Max India Ltd. HC-P&H 268 ITR 128 5 3 Malabar Industries Co. Ltd. Supreme Court 243 ITR 83 7 4 Virtusa Consulting Services HC-Madras 442 ITR 385 12 (P.) Ltd. 5 Sunbeam Auto Ltd. HC-Delhi 332 ITR 167 22 6 Spectra Shares & Scrips HC-Andhra 354 ITR 35 33 (P.) Ltd. Pradesh 7 Saravana Developers HC-Karnataka 387 ITR 239 57 8 Chemsworth (P.) Ltd. HC-Karnataka 119 taxmann.com 65 358 9 Hari Iron Trading Co HC-Punjab & 263 ITR 437 69 Haryana 10 Shriram Properties Limited ITAT-Chennai 2023 (4) TMI 375 76 11 Cavinkare (P.) Ltd. ITAT-Chennai 149 taxmann.com 97 296 12 Rajkumar Impex Pvt. Ltd. ITAT-Chenna…

SHREE MURLIDHAR JEWELLERS,JAMNAGAR vs. THE PR.CIT-IV, JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RJT/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2016-17 Shree Murlidharjewellers Vs. The Pr.Cit-4 Chandi Bazar Jamnagar. Jamnagar 361 001. Pan : Aaifs 4781 N अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assesseeby : Shri D.M. Rindani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Ld.Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/05/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/08/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Guptapresent Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Passed By The Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income-Tax)-4, Jamnagar [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld.Pr.Cit)”] Dated 11.12.2019In Exercise Of His Revisionary Power Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act , 1961 ("The Act" For Short) Over The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Asst.Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: I) The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax - 4, Jamnagar Erred In Assuming Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act, Particularly In The Light Of Reasons Stated By Him In The Show Cause Notice & In The Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Act & Hence The Impugned Order Is Bad In Law. 2 Ii) The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax - 4, Jamnagar Erred In Directing The Assessing Officer To Make Addition Of Rs. 70,89,098/- U/S 69 Of The Act By Failing To Appreciate That Provisions Of Section 69 Were Not Attracted In.”

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, ld.CIT-DR

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 263Section 69

…s for holding that the excess stock as 'undisclosed investment' under section 69 of the Act are satisfied. 19. Relying on the decision of this Court in Spectra Shares and Spectra Shares & Scrips (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2013] 36 taxmann.com 348/219 Taxman 61 (Mag.)/354 ITR 35 the Tribunal held non-recording of reasons cannot be a ground to come to a conclusion that the opinion of the Assessing Officer was erroneous for the purposes of section 263 of the Act. Explanation (2) of section 263 of the Act elucidates cases where the opinion of the Assessing Officer can be treated to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interes…

KANOI TEA PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. P.C.I.T. - 2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/KOL/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R

Section 249Section 253Section 263Section 3Section 5

…of the revenue - Rampyari Devi Saraogi v. CIT [1968] 67 ITR 84 (SC) and in Smt. Tara Devi Aggarwal v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 323 (SC). [Emphasis Supplied]” 16.2. The Hone’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Spectra Shares and Scrips Pvt. Ltd. V CIT (AP) 354 ITR 35 had considered a number of judgments on this issue of exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and culled the principles laid down in the judgments as below : “24. In Malabar Industrial Co.Ltd. ( 2 Supra), the Supreme Court held that a bare reading of Sec.263 makes it clear that the prerequisite for t…

MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-16(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2016-17 Mylan Pharmaceuticals Vs. Ito,Ward-16(3) Private Limited I.T.Towers, Ac Guards Plot No.564/A/22, Masab Tank Road No.92 Hyderabad-500 004 Jubillee Hills, Hyderabad Telangana-500 096

For Appellant: Shri P.V.S.S.Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya,CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 37(1)

…hese circumstances, we have to see as to whether the order passed by the AO has become erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 17. We find the Hon'ble A.P High Court in the case of Spectra Shares & Script (P) Ltd vs. CIT, reported in 354 ITR 35 (A.P) while deciding an identical issue has observed as under: 14 ITA 122/Hyd/2022 “If there was an inquiry, even inadequate that would not by itself give occasion to the Commissioner to pass orders u/s 263 merely because he has a different opinion in the matter. It is only in cases of lack of inquiry that such a course of action would be open. A…

SHASHIKALA GUPTA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 222/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Smt. Shashikala Gupta Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 10(1) Pan:Aaspg1838N Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Darshan Jakharia, Ca Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 14/12/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 19/12/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.3.2022 Of The Learned Pr.Cit-1, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2017-18. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & Filed Her Return Of Income On 26.07.2017 For A.Y 2017-18 Admitting Income From House Property & Other Sources At Rs.3,66,720/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass & Issues On Which The Selection Was Made Was “Large Value Cash Deposited During Demonetization Period As Compared To Returned Income”. Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act Dated 9.8.2018 Was Issued & Served Electronically On The Assessee As Well As Page 1 Of 15

For Appellant: Shri Darshan Jakharia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…same. Under these circumstances, we have to see as to whether the impugned order passed by the Assessing Officer calls for revision u/s 263 of the I. T. Act. 12.1. The Hon'ble A.P High Court in the case of Spectra Shares & Script (P) Ltd vs. CIT, reported in 354 ITR 35 (A.P) while deciding an identical issue has observed as under: “If there was an inquiry, even inadequate that would not by itself give occasion to the Commissioner to pass orders u/s 263 merely because he has a different opinion in the matter. It is only in cases of lack of inquiry that such a course of action would be open. An assessment order ma…

M/S. ETA STAR INFOPARK,BENGALURU vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU-1, BENGALURU

ITA 248/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Annamalai, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

…Bank – Calcutta HC – IA No.GA/1 & 2/2018 – Date of order – 23.11.2021 (ii) CIT vs Gabriel India Ltd – 1993 203 ITR 108 Bom (iii) CIT vs Nirav Modi – Bombay HC in ITA Nos.117 & 119 of 2014 – Date of judgement – 16-6-2016 (iv) Spectra Shares & Scripts Pvt. Ltd 354 ITR 35 (Andhra Pradesh)(2013) (v) CIT vs Sunbeam Auto Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 167 (Delhi) (vi) PCIT vs Brahma Centre Development Pvt. Ltd. – Delhi HC in ITA No.116/2021 – Date of order – 5.7.2021 2.33 The appellant apprehends that the learned PCIT has invoked the revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act based on the audit objections and not on suo-moto disc…

M/S. ETA STAR INFOPARK,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BENGALURU

ITA 415/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Annamalai, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 263

N JAIDEEP REDDY ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 623/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. M. Narmada, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 224Section 263Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…oncluded assessment could not be taken up or in short settled issues cannot be unsettled unless there was incriminating material. 14. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble A.P High Court in the case of Spectra Shares & Scrips (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 354 ITR 35, he submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in the said decision has held that the Assessing Officer in the assessment order is not required to give detailed reasons and once it is clear that there was application of mind by an enquiry merely because the Commissioner entertains a different opinion in matter, cannot invoke his powers u/s 263 of…

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4