Dharmeshkumar Chimanlal Valsadia Vs PCIT

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Dharmeshkumar Chimanlal Valsadia, did not file any return of income for the assessment year 2017-18. The case was reopened based on information about cash and other credits totaling Rs. 2.72 crores in his bank accounts. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 148 on 31/03/2021, to which the assessee responded by filing a return of income on 30/04/2021, declaring income of Rs. 12,00,710/-. The Assessing Officer accepted the returned income and passed an assessment order on 28/03/2022 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax revised the assessment order on 08/03/2024, holding it erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. The assessee filed an appeal against this order.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the jurisdictional conditions for passing an order under Section 263 were satisfied.
• 2. Whether the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shri Raj Kumar Kalwani vs The DCIT, Circle (Intl. Tax), Jaipur

  Jaipur bench

• SVR Creations Pvt. Ltd. vs. The PCIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• Bhanwarlal Champalal Kanunga v. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax

  Ahmedabad bench

• Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax v/s The Wardha District Central Co–operative Bank Ltd.

  Nagpur bench

• Liberty Shoes Ltd. vs PCIT

  Other

• LinkedIn Technology Information Pvt Ltd Vs. The P.C.I.T