Revision u/s 263 - limitation provide for passing of order - the ...

Income Tax

August 26, 2019

Revision u/s 263 - limitation provide for passing of order - the delay involved in service was more than 9 months which is unreasonable and the department could not explain the reasons for such long delay in serving the order to the assessee as well as the AO - the order was passed beyond the time limit allowed under the Act, hence, the order passed u/s 263 was unsustainable and quashed

View Source

← Previous Next →

Revision u/s 263 - limitation provide for passing of order - the ...

Income Tax

August 26, 2019

You may also like:

Revision u.s 263 - assessment order passed pursuant to the revisionary order has resulted in reduction of tax liability - not prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue...

Revision u/s 263 - order cannot be passed by the CIT u/s 263 of the Act to ask the AO to decide whether the assessment order was erroneous or not - AT

Revision u/s 263 - period of limitation - We adopting a cautious but not a pedantic approach, though, refrain from restraining the A.O from proceeding with the...

Revision u/s 263 by CIT - We find that the assessment order qua the deduction under section 80(9)(2)(d) of the Act on account of interest earned from Surat Co-operative...

Revision u/s 263 - CIT was clothed with ample supervisory powers to direct for redoing the assessment provided twin conditions as envisaged by Section 263 were fulfilled.

Revision u/s 264 in favor of assessee - petitioner has not waived his appellate right - delay of 2 years, 10 months and 8 days can not be condoned - HC

Revision u/s 263 - assessment order passed u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) - no any incriminating material unearthed by search team therefore Assessing Officer’s order is not erroneous.

Revision u/s 263 - impugned notice which seeks to give effect to an order u/s 263 for revision u/s 143(3) falls u/s 153(3) and not u/s 153 (2A) - there is no limitation...

Revision u/s 263 - any loss of revenue as a consequence of an order passed by the Assessing Officer cannot be treated as prejudicial to the interests of revenue - AT

Revision u/s 263 - when in the threshold itself, the AO has failed to do his duty in conducting and verifying the issues involved, then in such situation, explanation...

Quick Updates: