MSRDC SEA LINK LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -4 , MUMBAI

ITA 3693/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 September 2026AY 2020-2114 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, MSRDC Sea Link Ltd., acquired the right to collect toll and operate a sea link bridge for Rs. 3000 crores, treating it as an intangible asset and claiming depreciation. The PCIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, considering the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the PCIT erred in applying CBDT Circular No. 9/2014 as the assessee was not the builder/developer but had acquired a license to collect toll. The assessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the right to collect toll acquired by the assessee is an intangible asset eligible for depreciation, and if the PCIT correctly exercised jurisdiction under Section 263.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 32(1)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Respondent: Shri. Rajdeep Singh, CIT DR
Pronounced: 25.09.2026

PER SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE PRESIDENT:

By filing the present appeal, the assessee has called into question the validity of order dated 27.03.2025 passed u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) by learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai (‘ld. PCIT’ for short), pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y. for short) 2020-21. 2. Briefly the facts are, the Government of Maharashtra, intended to build/construct

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 13,474 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →