DCIT(CC)-8(3), MUMBAI vs. 63 MOONS TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, finding that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as they were initiated beyond four years and based on a mere change of opinion. The exemptions under Section 10A/10AA were also rightly allowed by the CIT(A) as the assessee had provided sufficient documentary evidence.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s orders which quashed reassessment proceedings and allowed exemptions under Section 10A/10AA. The reassessment was initiated beyond four years, and the CIT(A) found it was based on a change of opinion without sufficient tangible material.
What were the issues?
Whether reassessment proceedings initiated beyond four years were valid, and whether the denial of exemptions under Section 10A/10AA was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 10A,Section 10AA,Section 35(1)(ii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd.1,673 citing320 ITR 561 · 2010 · SC · Read judgment
- Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT288 citing162 Taxmann.com 225 · 2024 · HC
- ITO v. TechSpan India (P) Ltd.194 citing92 Taxmann.com 361 · 2018 · SC · Read judgment
- Cedric De Souza Faria v. DCIT4 citing400 ITR 30 · 2018 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These three appeals filed by Revenue are against the orders of ld. CIT(A)- 50, Mumbai, vide
i. Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072723393(1), dated 30.01.2025 passed against the assessment order by DCIT CC- 8(3), Mumbai, u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 18.12.2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12. ii. Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072723823(1), dated 30.01.2025 passed against the assessment order by DCIT CC- 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. AY 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 8(3), Mumbai, u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147
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.
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 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026