Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

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 :

        2023 (1) TMI 969 - 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

        ITAT upholds PCIT order under Section 263, directing de novo assessment for Section 80IB deduction The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax's (PCIT) order under Section 263, finding the Assessing Officer's ...
                        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.

                            ITAT upholds PCIT order under Section 263, directing de novo assessment for Section 80IB deduction

                            The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax's (PCIT) order under Section 263, finding the Assessing Officer's (AO) failure to investigate multiple flat allotments and verify Section 80IB(10)(f) conditions as prejudicial to Revenue. The ITAT confirmed the PCIT's directive for a de novo assessment to assess the deduction claimed under Section 80IB, dismissing the assessee's appeal and deeming the original assessment erroneous.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
                            2. Setting aside the original assessment and directing a de novo assessment regarding the eligibility of deduction claimed under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Assumption of Jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

                            The assessee challenged the correctness of the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The PCIT exercised jurisdiction under Section 263, noting that the assessee-firm had sold more than one flat to single individuals, which contravenes sub-clause (f) of sub-section (10) of Section 80IB of the Act. The PCIT observed that the Assessing Officer (AO) had not made any inquiry or disallowance regarding the deduction claimed under Section 80IB during the assessment. This lack of inquiry rendered the AO's order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The PCIT initiated proceedings for revision of the order under Section 263 by issuing a show-cause notice to the assessee.

                            In response, the assessee argued that the multiple allotments were due to clerical errors and provided details of the booking dates, claiming that these bookings were made before the amendment of the Act in 2010, which introduced the relevant sub-section. However, the PCIT rejected these contentions, stating that the AO had failed to inquire into the issue of multiple allotments in light of Section 80IB(10)(f). Consequently, the PCIT held that the AO's order was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interest.

                            2. Setting Aside the Original Assessment and Directing a De Novo Assessment:

                            The PCIT directed the AO to frame a de novo assessment after considering the eligibility of the deduction claimed under Section 80IB. The assessee contended that the AO had already examined the issue during the original assessment and that the order passed by the PCIT was not sustainable. The assessee provided details of cheques received from flat owners as evidence of bookings made before the amendment of the Act, asserting that the AO had considered these details.

                            The Revenue argued that the AO had not made any inquiry into the issue and had allowed the claim without proper adjudication. The ITAT noted that the AO had issued a notice under Section 142(1) asking for details of persons to whom flats were sold but had not verified the specific details regarding multiple allotments. The ITAT observed that the details of cheques and booking dates provided by the assessee were not submitted during the original assessment, indicating that the AO had not examined these details.

                            The ITAT held that the AO's failure to investigate the issue of multiple allotments and the conditions of Section 80IB(10)(f) rendered the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interest. The ITAT upheld the PCIT's order, confirming that the AO's order was unsustainable in law and warranted revision under Section 263.

                            Conclusion:

                            The ITAT dismissed the assessee's appeal, upholding the PCIT's order under Section 263. The ITAT concluded that the AO's failure to verify the conditions of Section 80IB(10)(f) and the lack of inquiry into the issue of multiple allotments made the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interest. The ITAT confirmed the PCIT's direction for a de novo assessment to properly examine the eligibility of the deduction claimed under Section 80IB.
                            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