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.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
ITAT held that the PCIT's revision u/s. 263 was misplaced and set aside: the AO had made specific enquiries into depreciation claimed u/s. 32 on immovable properties partly let out and had examined the assessee's detailed replies, taking a legally permissible view accepting depreciation for the period properties were employed in business while rental income was offered for the let-out period. Tribunal found there was neither lack nor inadequacy of inquiry by the AO, thus jurisdiction u/s. 263 could not be invoked. On merits the assessee satisfactorily demonstrated entitlement to depreciation for business use periods; the appeal was allowed and the s. 263 action quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.