57 results for “reassessment u/s 147”+ Section 21(5)clear
Sorted by relevance
Key Topics
Showing 1–20 of 57 · Page 1 of 3
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed
Bench: Shri George Mathan & Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Omm Dhanalaxmi Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1. Jewellers, Bazar Chowk, Main Road, Angul-759122 Pan/Gir No.Aagfd 8791 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/9/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/9/2024 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld Pr.Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 U/S.263 Of The Act Dated 30.3.2024 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: “1) That The Ld. Pr Cit Bhubaneswar Has Erred In Law By Utilizing Section 263 For Directing The Assessing Officer To Do Necessary Verification As Per The Order Of Hon'Ble Itat Cuttack Bench Vide Order Dated 01-10-2019 Which Was Already Barred By Limitation. Provisions Of 263 Does Not Allow To Proceed For A Matter Which Was Already Barred By Limitation. Hence, The Order Passed Us 263 Needs To Be Quashed In To.
5 | 17 Assessment Year : 2013-14 tribunal. Therefore, the revision, if any, could be made against the order of the AO passed u/s 254 of the Act dt. 22.06.2021 and not against the order passed u/s 147 rws 144B of the Act, dt. 29.09.2021. However, the Pr. CIT held the reassessment order dt. 29.09.2021 as erroneous and prejudicial