Revision by CIT u/s 263

Case Summary - Revision by CIT

Summary and Review of Case Laws on Revision of Order by CIT u/s 263

Subscribe to this RSS feed

Monday, 27 June 2016 13:32

Deduction u/s 80-IB - Once the Approval is Granted by the Prescribed Authority it would No longer be Open for the AO to Verify the Satisfaction of the Conditions Prescribed under Rule 18DA in order to Refuse Deduction - Gujarat High Court

Approval under Rule 18D & Deduction u/s 80-IB

Principal CIT vs. B.A.RESEARCH INDIA LTD

Published in High Court Cases

Friday, 17 June 2016 11:56

When the Order Under Section 263 Sought to Revise the Issue Decided in the Original Assessment Order then the Limitation Must Necessarily Begin to Run from the Order Under Section 143(3) and Not from Order Under Section 147 - Cochin Tribunal

The Thirumbadi Rubber Co Ltd vs. DCIT

Published in Tribunal Cases

Thursday, 07 April 2016 17:18

Section 263 - Cannot be initiated on debatable issues - Tax is not required to be deducted from reimbursement of actual expenses under any provisions of the Act - Mumbai Tribunal

Neo Sports Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

Published in Tribunal Cases

Monday, 29 February 2016 15:07

Section 40A(3) - Unjustified when payments were made to supervisors - Section 263 - Action not warranted when AO has taken a concise decision of not making addition - Amritsar Tribunal

Sartaj Singh vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

Published in Tribunal Cases

Wednesday, 17 February 2016 16:55

Section 263 - Fulfillment of twin condition is must i.e. assessment order should be erroneous and it should cause a prejudice to the Revenue. If any one condition is lacking, then action u/s 263 would not be justified - Ahmedabad Tribunal

Jay Agriculture & Horticulture Pvt.Ltd. vs. Pr.CIT

Published in Tribunal Cases

Saturday, 13 February 2016 18:29

Expenditure incurred by the assessee on issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB) is revenue expenditure - Hyderabad Tribunal

Gati Limited vs. Income Tax Officer

Published in Tribunal Cases

Sunday, 27 September 2015 11:23

Section 263 - Depreciation allowed after considering assessee's explanation which may be debatable however action u/s 263 is unjustified - Ahmedabad tribunal

Adani wilmar Limited vs. DCIT

Published in Tribunal Cases

Sunday, 23 August 2015 11:55

Section 263 - Justified when CIT categorically pointed out the shortfall and absence of inquiry done by the AO, Assessee not required to be put to notice on the evidences relied by CIT - Panaji Tribunal

Timblo Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

Published in Tribunal Cases

Wednesday, 19 August 2015 20:30

Section 263 - AO failed to make inquiry on important issues and thus order is erroneous and prejudicial to interest of Revenue - CIT's action u/s 263 justified - Delhi Tribunal

PVS Multiplex (India) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Published in Tribunal Cases

Monday, 10 August 2015 17:50

Section 263 - When the AO inquired and applied his mind assessment order can not be held to be erroneous and Section 263 can not be invoked - Hyderabad Tribunal

Sri Chava Srinivasa Rao vs. Income Tax Officer

Published in Tribunal Cases

Title

Court

Cout Name

Section

Order Date

Favouring

Categories
Supreme Court Cases (14) High Court Cases (54) Tribunal Cases (119)

Sections

2(7) 2(15) 2(22) 2(22)(e) 2(b) 4(i) 9(1) 10(2) 10A 10B 11 12 12A 12AA 13 14(A) 14A 22 23 28 32 35 35(2A) 35A 35D 36(1) 36(1)(ii) 36(1)(iii) 36(2) 37 37(1) 40(A) 40(a)(i) 40(a)(ia) 40(a)(iii) 40A(2)(b) 40A(3) 40B 41 41(1) 43(5) 43B 44 44AB 45 48 50(2) 50B 50C 54 54(G) 54F 55A 68 69 69C 71(2) 80G 80HHC 80IA 80IB 80IB(7A) 80IC 80P 90 92 92C 92CA 92F 115AD 115BBE 115JA 115JB 115WE 115WG 124 127 132 132(4) 133(6) 133A 139(1) 142(2A) 143(2) 143(3) 144(3) 144C 145 145(3) 147 148 150 151(2) 153A 153C 154 155(2) 158 158BB 158BC 158BE 158BFA 159(2) 192 194C 194I 194J 195 201 201(1) 201(1A) 244(1A) 244A 245 254 254(2A) 260A 263 269SS 271 271(1)(b) 271(1)(c) 271AAA 271D 274 276B 282 292C Rule 8D Rule 46A

Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special offers!

Analysis of Transfer Pricing, International Transactions Case Laws

Permanent Establishment (PE) - Unless the Conditions of Paragraph 5 of Article 7 of the Indo-US DTAA is Satisfied, It Cannot be held that Nortel India Constituted a Fixed Place of Business of the Assessee - Delhi High Court
Nortel Networks India International Inc. Vs. DIT Read More
Transfer Pricing Method - Whether Disallowing Claim of Taxpayer by following CUP Legitimate? - Is there a CUP?
The recent practice of the Indian revenue authorities (hereinafter “IRA”) have been notoriously disallowing the claim of the taxpayer towards… Read More
Inclusion & Exclusion from the List of Comparables Justified : No Substantial Question of Law : Delhi High Court
STERIA INDIA LTD. vs. DCIT Read More
Transfer Pricing - No Income be Taxed in the hands of Foreign Enterprise when the Correct Arm's Length Price is Applied and Paid - Mumbai Tribunal
Taj TV Ltd vs. ADIT Read More
Permanent Establishment (PE) - Project office used as communication channel falls within the exception of clause (e) of paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the DTAA and cannot be construed as the Assessee’s PE in India - Delhi High Court
National Petroleum Construction Co. vs. DIT Read More
PE Test - Is Fixed place of business @ the disposal of foreign enterprise?
The relevance to determine existence of PE of a foreign enterprise earning income in India cannot be undermined particularly when… Read More
Capital Gains on buy back of own shares under an approved scheme of arrangement in view of DTAA between India and Netherlands is taxable but at concessional rate of 10% - Mumbai Tribunal
Accordis Beheer B V vs. Director of Income Tax Read More
No existence of international transaction involving Advertising and Marketing Expenses between the Assessee and its AE - Delhi High Court
Bausch & Lomb Eyecare (I) Pvt. Ltd. Read More

Deduction u/s 80-IB - Once the Approval is Granted by the Prescribed Authority it would No longer be Open for the AO to Verify the Satisfaction of the Conditions Prescribed under Rule 18DA in order to Refuse Deduction - Gujarat High Court

When the Order Under Section 263 Sought to Revise the Issue Decided in the Original Assessment Order then the Limitation Must Necessarily Begin to Run from the Order Under Section 143(3) and Not from Order Under Section 147 - Cochin Tribunal

Section 263 - Cannot be initiated on debatable issues - Tax is not required to be deducted from reimbursement of actual expenses under any provisions of the Act - Mumbai Tribunal

Section 40A(3) - Unjustified when payments were made to supervisors - Section 263 - Action not warranted when AO has taken a concise decision of not making addition - Amritsar Tribunal

Section 263 - Fulfillment of twin condition is must i.e. assessment order should be erroneous and it should cause a prejudice to the Revenue. If any one condition is lacking, then action u/s 263 would not be justified - Ahmedabad Tribunal

Expenditure incurred by the assessee on issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB) is revenue expenditure - Hyderabad Tribunal

Section 263 - Depreciation allowed after considering assessee's explanation which may be debatable however action u/s 263 is unjustified - Ahmedabad tribunal

Section 263 - Justified when CIT categorically pointed out the shortfall and absence of inquiry done by the AO, Assessee not required to be put to notice on the evidences relied by CIT - Panaji Tribunal

Section 263 - AO failed to make inquiry on important issues and thus order is erroneous and prejudicial to interest of Revenue - CIT's action u/s 263 justified - Delhi Tribunal

Section 263 - When the AO inquired and applied his mind assessment order can not be held to be erroneous and Section 263 can not be invoked - Hyderabad Tribunal

Title

Tag

Court

Cout Name

Section

Order Date

Favouring

Analysis of Transfer Pricing, International Transactions Case Laws

Permanent Establishment (PE) - Unless the Conditions of Paragraph 5 of Article 7 of the Indo-US DTAA is Satisfied, It Cannot be held that Nortel India Constituted a Fixed Place of Business of the Assessee - Delhi High Court

Transfer Pricing Method - Whether Disallowing Claim of Taxpayer by following CUP Legitimate? - Is there a CUP?

Inclusion & Exclusion from the List of Comparables Justified : No Substantial Question of Law : Delhi High Court

Transfer Pricing - No Income be Taxed in the hands of Foreign Enterprise when the Correct Arm's Length Price is Applied and Paid - Mumbai Tribunal

Permanent Establishment (PE) - Project office used as communication channel falls within the exception of clause (e) of paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the DTAA and cannot be construed as the Assessee’s PE in India - Delhi High Court

PE Test - Is Fixed place of business @ the disposal of foreign enterprise?

Capital Gains on buy back of own shares under an approved scheme of arrangement in view of DTAA between India and Netherlands is taxable but at concessional rate of 10% - Mumbai Tribunal

No existence of international transaction involving Advertising and Marketing Expenses between the Assessee and its AE - Delhi High Court

Recommended Articles