<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (8) TMI 174 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262257</link>
    <description>The ITAT Kolkata upheld the validity of the CIT&#039;s revision under section 263, finding the AO&#039;s enquiry into the share capital issued at a high premium inadequate and erroneous, prejudicial to revenue. The AO failed to properly investigate the genuineness of the share premium despite suspicious circumstances, justifying CIT&#039;s intervention. The tribunal rejected contentions regarding limitation, territorial jurisdiction, and procedural defects such as non-service or signature of notice, holding that opportunity of hearing was duly provided. It clarified that section 263 can be invoked even after search proceedings and that the order under section 143(1) is not an &quot;order&quot; for revision purposes. The decision confirmed that the CIT can set aside erroneous assessment orders and direct fresh enquiry by the AO. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the revision order against the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:21:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392303" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 174 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262257</link>
      <description>The ITAT Kolkata upheld the validity of the CIT&#039;s revision under section 263, finding the AO&#039;s enquiry into the share capital issued at a high premium inadequate and erroneous, prejudicial to revenue. The AO failed to properly investigate the genuineness of the share premium despite suspicious circumstances, justifying CIT&#039;s intervention. The tribunal rejected contentions regarding limitation, territorial jurisdiction, and procedural defects such as non-service or signature of notice, holding that opportunity of hearing was duly provided. It clarified that section 263 can be invoked even after search proceedings and that the order under section 143(1) is not an &quot;order&quot; for revision purposes. The decision confirmed that the CIT can set aside erroneous assessment orders and direct fresh enquiry by the AO. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the revision order against the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262257</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>