Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2017 (8) TMI 318 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal overturns PCIT's decision, ruling in favor of appellant in assessment order cancellation case The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT) erred in canceling the assessment order under section 263. It found that the ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal overturns PCIT's decision, ruling in favor of appellant in assessment order cancellation case

                            The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT) erred in canceling the assessment order under section 263. It found that the Assessing Officer (AO) had conducted adequate enquiries, and the order was not erroneous or prejudicial to Revenue. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, quashing the PCIT's order under section 263 and allowing the appeal.




                            Issues Involved:

                            1. Legality and propriety of the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT) under section 263(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
                            2. Adequacy of opportunity of being heard provided to the assessee.
                            3. Justification for initiating proceedings under section 263.
                            4. Assessment order's alleged erroneous and prejudicial nature to the interests of the Revenue.
                            5. Cancellation of the assessment order by the PCIT.
                            6. Direction by the PCIT to the Assessing Officer (AO) to conduct necessary enquiries instead of conducting them himself.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Legality and Propriety of the Order Passed by the PCIT:

                            The appellant contended that the PCIT erred in law and facts by passing an illegal and improper order against the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal examined the provisions of section 263, which allows the Commissioner to revise an assessment order if it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized that both conditions must be satisfied for invoking section 263. An order can be deemed erroneous if there is an incorrect assumption of facts or incorrect application of law by the AO. However, if the AO has taken one of the possible views after due enquiry, the order cannot be deemed erroneous.

                            2. Adequacy of Opportunity of Being Heard:

                            The appellant argued that the PCIT passed the order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard and without considering the submissions made. The Tribunal noted that the PCIT issued a show-cause notice and considered the assessee's reply before passing the order. The Tribunal found that the principles of natural justice were followed as the assessee was given an opportunity to present its case.

                            3. Justification for Initiating Proceedings Under Section 263:

                            The appellant challenged the initiation of proceedings under section 263. The Tribunal observed that the PCIT has the administrative power to call for and examine records without needing to show any reason. The Tribunal found that the PCIT was justified in initiating proceedings as part of his duty to ensure that the AO's order was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue.

                            4. Assessment Order's Alleged Erroneous and Prejudicial Nature:

                            The PCIT considered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial due to two main issues: (i) a discrepancy in the total turnover reported by the assessee and as per Form 26AS, and (ii) the payment of consultancy charges. The Tribunal noted that the AO had issued notices and received detailed replies from the assessee regarding these issues. The AO had made enquiries and was satisfied with the explanations provided by the assessee. The Tribunal held that the AO's order was not erroneous as it was based on a possible view taken after due enquiry.

                            5. Cancellation of the Assessment Order by the PCIT:

                            The PCIT cancelled the assessment order on the grounds of inadequate enquiry. The Tribunal emphasized that inadequacy of enquiry does not justify revision under section 263 if the AO has made some enquiry and taken a possible view. The Tribunal found that the AO had made adequate enquiries and the PCIT's order was not justified.

                            6. Direction by the PCIT to the AO to Conduct Necessary Enquiries:

                            The appellant argued that the PCIT should have conducted the necessary enquiries himself instead of directing the AO. The Tribunal noted that the PCIT has the power to direct the AO to conduct further enquiries if deemed necessary. However, in this case, the Tribunal found that the AO had already made adequate enquiries, and there was no need for further direction from the PCIT.

                            Conclusion:

                            The Tribunal concluded that the PCIT was not correct in exercising jurisdiction under section 263 and cancelling the assessment. The AO had made adequate enquiries, and the order passed by him was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The Tribunal quashed the order passed under section 263 and allowed the appeal of the assessee.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found