RPG LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED,WORLI MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5, MUMBAI, CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2769/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 June 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2769/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 RPG Life Sciences Limited RPG House, 4th Floor Dr. Annie Besant Road Worli Colony S.O Mumbai Maharashtra - 400030 [PAN: AADCR8060K] Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5, Mumbai अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Krish Desai, A/R Revenue by: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT, D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing :1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue of CSR expenditure being claimed as a donation u/s 80G is a debatable issue. Therefore, the view taken by the AO during the assessment proceedings was a plausible view, and the Pr. CIT's assumption of jurisdiction u/s 263 based on a change of opinion was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee debited Rs. 34,00,000/- towards Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenses. The Pr. CIT assumed jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, believing the expenditure was not allowable as a deduction u/s 80G and was prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the Pr. CIT was justified in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act when the issue raised was debatable and the AO's view was plausible?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 80G,Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Krish Desai, A/R
Hearing: 18/06/2025Pronounced: 20/06/2025

O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of ld. Pr. CIT, Mumbai – 5 [hereinafter “the ld. Pr. CIT”] dated pertaining to AY 2018-19.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. Pr. CIT erred in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act further erred in holding that the assessment order dated 21/09/2022 framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act is not only erroneous but also prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 3. The cause for the assumption of jurisdiction by the ld. Pr. CIT can be understood from the following notices:-

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →