The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving a revision...
Revision u/s 263: AO's order erroneous & prejudicial to revenue. Lack of enquiry on provisions claim. PCIT decision upheld.
📋
Contents
Cases Cited
Referred In
Notifications
Circulars
Forms
Manuals
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Plus +
Source NTF
AI Summary
Similar
Note
Bookmark
Share
https://www.taxtmi.com/hi...
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
ExpandCollapse
Income TaxJune 7, 2024Case LawsAT
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving a revision u/s 263 regarding the allowability of provisions claimed by the assessee. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) found the Assessing Officer's (AO) order to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue due to lack of inquiry on the AO's part. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not apply his mind to the issues raised, rendering the assessment order flawed. The Tribunal upheld the PCIT's decision, emphasizing the importance of proper inquiry by the AO. The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals concerning capital expenditure on LAN network and electrical expenses, directing the AO to verify if the disallowance was made by the assessee.
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving a revision u/s 263 regarding the allowability of provisions claimed by the assessee. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) found the Assessing Officer's (AO) order to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue due to lack of inquiry on the AO's part. The Tribunal noted that the AO did not apply his mind to the issues raised, rendering the assessment order flawed. The Tribunal upheld the PCIT's decision, emphasizing the importance of proper inquiry by the AO. The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeals concerning capital expenditure on LAN network and electrical expenses, directing the AO to verify if the disallowance was made by the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick
reference only.