CENTRE FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL CHANGE,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

ITA 676/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 April 2022AY 2016-1711 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO had applied its mind to the issue of rent from AIILSG, considering the long-standing practice and the conditional grant of land. The revision was deemed erroneous as the assessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, allotted space in its building to another charitable trust (AIILSG) at a nominal rent. The CIT(E) initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, alleging the Assessing Officer (AO) failed to examine the adequacy of rent charged and a donation received from AIILSG.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in invoking Section 263 powers when the AO had considered the issue of rent from a related charitable entity and the assessment order was not erroneous.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 11,Section 13

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI

Hearing: 25/01/2022Pronounced: 22/04/2022

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

These two appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai [in short 'the CIT(E)’] passed u/s.263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’) for the 2 assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17, respectively. Both impugned

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.

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 →