TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court rules in favor of assessee, denounces CIT's cancellation of A.O.'s order under Section 263 as legal error.</h1> <h3>CIT Versus MERCURY METAL PVT. LTD</h3> CIT Versus MERCURY METAL PVT. LTD - TMI Issues:1. Revision of income tax return and claim of deduction u/s. 80HHC.2. Treatment of export incentives and licence premium in the assessment.3. Validity of CIT's decision under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.Analysis:1. The first issue involved the revision of the income tax return by the assessee, where the claim of deduction under section 80HHC was revised. The CIT found discrepancies in the return filed for A.Y. 1993-94 and the revised return, leading to a scrutiny of the export incentive claimed. The A.O. had initially considered the export incentive as income for A.Y. 1993-94, although it was received in A.Y. 1994-95. The CIT issued a show cause notice under Section 263 of the Act to revise the assessment based on these discrepancies.2. The second issue revolved around the treatment of export incentives and licence premium in the assessment. The CIT argued that the profit on the sale of the licence should only be considered when the licence is actually sold and profits are received, not on a mercantile basis. The CIT questioned the inclusion of income in A.Y. 1993-94 when it was received in A.Y. 1994-95. The Appellate Tribunal initially set aside the CIT's order, leading to further legal scrutiny.3. The third issue focused on the validity of the CIT's decision under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Appellate Tribunal referred the question of law to the High Court regarding the cancellation of the CIT's order. The High Court analyzed the case law and determined that the CIT's decision to set aside the A.O.'s order was erroneous. The High Court held that the A.O.'s interpretation of Section 80HHC was correct, and the CIT's action was not justified.In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the CIT's decision to cancel the A.O.'s order under Section 263 was a serious error in law. The High Court's decision was based on the interpretation of the relevant sections of the Income Tax Act and previous legal precedents, ultimately upholding the assessee's position in the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
