Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

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 :

        2022 (9) TMI 457 - 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 Section 263 order, emphasizes consistency in related party assessments. The Tribunal quashed the PCIT's order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, finding that the AO conducted sufficient inquiries and applied due ...
                        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 Section 263 order, emphasizes consistency in related party assessments.

                            The Tribunal quashed the PCIT's order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, finding that the AO conducted sufficient inquiries and applied due diligence. The appeal was allowed, stressing the importance of consistency in assessments among related parties. The decision was rendered on 22.08.2022.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.
                            2. Validity of proceedings initiated under Section 263 based on audit objections.
                            3. Adequacy of the Assessing Officer's (AO) enquiry and application of mind.
                            4. Consistency in assessment orders between related parties.
                            5. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act:
                            The primary issue is whether the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) was justified in assuming jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The PCIT held that the assessment order dated 30.11.2019 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The PCIT pointed out that there was an agreement to sell dated 01.11.2010, and payments were made in the assessment year 2011-12, which the AO failed to reconcile. The PCIT concluded that there was a lack of enquiry and non-application of mind by the AO, leading to the setting aside of the assessment order for fresh consideration.

                            2. Validity of proceedings initiated under Section 263 based on audit objections:
                            The assessee contended that the jurisdiction assumed by the PCIT under Section 263 was invalid as it was based solely on an audit objection dated 30.11.2018. The assessee argued that the proceedings under Section 263 were void ab initio. The Tribunal noted that the AO had accepted the assessee's explanation that no payments were made towards the property purchase in the assessment year 2011-12 and that the sale deed was executed in the assessment year 2013-14.

                            3. Adequacy of the AO's enquiry and application of mind:
                            The Tribunal observed that the AO had taken a conscious decision to accept the returned income of the assessee after considering her submissions and verifying the facts. The AO concluded that no further enquiries were required. The Tribunal emphasized that if the PCIT doubted the assessee's contentions, he should have provided contrary evidence, which was not done. The Tribunal cited various judicial precedents, including the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's rulings, distinguishing between lack of enquiry and inadequate enquiry. It was held that inadequate enquiry does not justify revisionary proceedings under Section 263 merely because the PCIT has a different opinion.

                            4. Consistency in assessment orders between related parties:
                            The Tribunal highlighted the principle of consistency, noting that the reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee's husband, who was jointly involved in the property purchase, were dropped by the AO. The PCIT did not initiate revisionary proceedings in the husband's case. The Tribunal cited the order of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Smt. Amarjit Kaur vs. ITO, emphasizing that on identical facts, there cannot be two separate conclusions. The Tribunal ruled that the Department should have maintained consistency.

                            5. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal:
                            The Tribunal addressed the delay of 205 days in filing the appeal, attributing it to the country-wide lockdown due to the Covid-19 situation. The Tribunal relied on the Hon'ble Apex Court's order, which excluded the period from March 15, 2020, to March 14, 2021, from the limitation period. Consequently, the Tribunal admitted the appeal, holding that there was no actual delay in filing.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal quashed the order passed by the PCIT under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, holding that the AO had made adequate enquiries and applied his mind. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the Tribunal emphasized the need for consistency in assessment orders between related parties. The order was pronounced on 22.08.2022.
                            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