NCDEX INVESTOR (CLIENT) PROTECTION FUND TRUST,MUMBAI vs. THE CIT (EXEM), MUMBAI

ITA 1917/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 September 2023AY 2018-1911 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment order was not erroneous. Relying on a coordinate bench's decision, it was found that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 10(23EC) for contributions and Section 11/12 for other income, as the amendment to Section 11(7) making simultaneous claims impermissible was effective only from April 1, 2024.

What were the facts?

The assessee, NCDEX Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust, claimed exemption under Section 10(23EC) for contributions and under Section 11/12 for other income. The CIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, holding that claiming both exemptions simultaneously was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue due to Section 11(7).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee could claim exemption under Section 10(23EC) and Section 11/12 simultaneously, and if the CIT erred in invoking Section 263 based on this interpretation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 10(23EC),Section 11,Section 12,Section 11(7)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Abdulkadir Jawadwala, AR
For Respondent: Shri S Srinivasu, CIT DR
Hearing: 27.09.2023Pronounced: 27.09.2023

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM:

01.

This appeal is filed by NCDEX Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust for A.Y. 2018-19, wherein the Revisionary order passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 27th March, 2023, by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai [the learned CIT ] holding that assessment order dated 4th March, 2021, passed under Section 143(3) read with section 143 (3A) and 143 (3B) of the Act is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and therefore, NCDEX Investor (Client) Protection Fund Trust; A.Y. 2018

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →