Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

As is discernible from the grounds of appeal, the order passed by the Pr. CIT under Sec. 263 of the Act has primarily been assailedfor adjudication of two issues viz. (i) that, whether or not the assumption of jurisdiction and the consequential order passed by the Pr. CIT under Sec. 263 is in accordance with law; and (ii) that, as to whether or not the Pr. CIT is right in law and the facts of thecasein declining the assessee’s claim for depreciation on the leasehold rights by concluding that the same did not fall within the meaning of “intangible assets” as contemplated in Sec. 32(1)(ii) of the Act.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961— Revision — As long as the requisite conditions for assumption of jurisdiction under Sec. 263 are satisfied by a revisional authority, no infirmity can be related to the validity of assumption of such jurisdiction by the said authority and withdrawal of the assessee’s claim for depreciation for the immediately preceding year by the A.O by taking recourse to re-assessment proceedings under Sec. 147, would debar the Pr. CIT from exercising his revisional jurisdiction under Sec. 263, despite the fact that the assessment order passed by the A.O allowing assessee’s claim for depreciation on leasehold rights was found by the revisional authority to be erroneous, insofar it was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue - - GOLDMOHAR DESIGN AND APPAREL PARK LTD. V/s PR. CIT - [2020] 27 ITCD Online 057 (ITAT-MUMBAI)