Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 2797 2008 SLD 2797 (2008) 297 ITR 99
Allahabad High Court
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Mahendra Kumar Bansal
R.K. AGRAWAL AND VIKRAM NATH, JJ.
A.N. Mahajan for the Applicant. R.R. Kapoor and Krishna Agrawal for the
Respondent.

IT REFERENCE NO. 56 OF 1994 JULY 20, 2007

Law:

Section:

Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Revision - Of order prejudicial to interest of revenue Merely because ITO has not written lengthy order, it would not establish that assessment order passed under section 143(3)/148 is erroneous and prejudicial to interest of Revenue, without bringing on record specific instances For the assessment year 1983-84 the assessment had been made under section 143(3)/148. The date fixed by the assessing authority was 18-7-1986 and on that very date the assessee's counsel had filed certain details and evidence and after discussion the assessment was framed. Even though in the assessment order there was no mention that detailed enquiry had been made nor any evidence had been discussed yet the returned income was accepted. The necessity for making assessment under section 143(3)/148 was on account of the return having been filed beyond the prescribed period. Held that merely because the ITO had not written lengthy order it would not establish that the assessment order passed under section 143(3)/148 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue without bringing on record specific instances. JUDGMENT R.K. Agrawal, J.-The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following questions of law under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the opinion of this court : "(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law to set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax passed under section 263, holding that it was based on mere suspicion and surmises ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is legally correct to hold that the order of the Income-tax Officer was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is legally correct to draw a conclusion that the Commissioner of Income-tax has failed to establish nexus between the stock found at the time of search with the assessment under appeal ?" The reference relates to the assessment…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492