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>Tribunal restores original assessment order quashed under Income Tax Act section 263.</h1> <h3>Nirmal Kumar Sheel Kumar Jain. Versus Income-Tax Officer.</h3> Nirmal Kumar Sheel Kumar Jain. Versus Income-Tax Officer. - TTJ 071, 494, Issues:1. Validity of the order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur was against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Gwalior, passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The contention of the assessee was that the Assessing Officer (AO) had considered the difference in stock found during a survey and the unexplained investment in the construction of a godown, and after due verification, did not make any addition to the income. The CIT, however, set aside the assessment under section 263, directing the AO to conduct a de novo assessment. The Departmental Representative argued that the surrender of excess stock and unexplained investment was not offered in the return of income, and the CIT's order was justified. The Tribunal analyzed the assessment order completed by the AO, where the surrender during the survey was discussed, and the assessee's explanations were considered. The Tribunal referred to a decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court and held that the assessment was not completed hastily, and the AO had considered all relevant facts. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the order passed under section 263 and restored the assessment order.This case involved a crucial issue regarding the proper completion of assessment by the AO and the subsequent validity of the CIT's order under section 263. The Tribunal carefully examined the facts, including the surrender made during the survey, the explanations provided by the assessee, and the actions taken by the AO. The Tribunal also relied on a decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court to support its conclusion that the assessment was not erroneous. By analyzing the assessment order and the arguments presented, the Tribunal determined that the AO had appropriately considered all relevant aspects before finalizing the assessment, leading to the quashing of the CIT's order and the restoration of the original assessment order.
TaxTMI 