Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.26 seconds)Section 263 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
M/S Midwest Granite (P) Limited, , ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 5 November, 2014
In the case of Spectra Shares & Scrips
Pvt Ltd. Vs. CIT (354 ITR 35 (AP), it has been held as
follows:
M/S. The Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Kerala ... on 10 February, 2000
10. Further we, rely on the decision of Malabar
Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (243 ITR 83), the Supreme
Court held that the phrase "prejudicial to the interests of
the Revenue" had to be read in conjunction with an
erroneous order passed by the AO, that every loss of
revenue as a consequence of an order of the AO cannot be
treated as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, for
example, when an AO adopted one of the courses
permissible in law and it had resulted in loss of revenue;
or where two views were possible and the AO had taken
9
ITA.No.1031/Hyd/2014 Mr. Sanka Venkata
Rama Rao, Paloncha, Khammam Dist.,
one view with which the CIT did not agree, it could not be
treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the interests
of the Revenue, unless the view taken by the Income Tax
Officer was unsustainable in law.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Kerala Nut Food Co., P. Gopinatha ... on 2 April, 1991
12. We also rely on the decision of the
jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Anand
Food Products wherein it was held that where the AO has
made inquiries on issues under consideration, assessee
had given detailed explanation by a letter furnishing data,
the Court concluded that the decision of the AO cannot be
prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, simply because
he did not make detailed discussion.
Section 133A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Eve'S Apparel vs First Income-Tax Officer on 30 January, 1987
841 & 1176/Hyd/2012 dated 3.12.2014
and in the case of M/s. Even's Classes vs. ITO in ITA No.
184/Hyd/2012 and ITA No.274/Hyd/2011 for AY 2006-
07, dated 23.04.2014.
1