HDB EMPLOYEES WELFARE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT -20, MUMBAI

ITA 744/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 April 2022AY 2015-167 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the expenses claimed by the assessee were not incurred wholly and exclusively for earning the dividend and interest income, and thus not allowable under Section 57(iii). The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had subsequently stopped claiming such expenses and settled disputes in later years.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust claimed expenses against dividend and interest income. The Assessing Officer (AO) accepted the return of income, resulting in a loss. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, considering the AO's order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT was justified in revising the assessment order under Section 263 when the AO had accepted the return after inquiry, and whether the expenses claimed were allowable under Section 57(iii).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 57(iii),Section 143(3)

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, “H” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Amarjit Singh (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth
For Respondent: Smt. Leena Srivastava,CIT-DR
Hearing: 20.01.2022Pronounced: 18.04.2022

Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-20, Mumbai (‘Pr.CIT for short) passed under section 263 of the I.T.Act, 1961, dated 12.03.2021 and pertains to the assessment year (A.Y.) 2015-16. 2. Grounds of appeal read as under:-

1.

The learned Pr. CIT - 20 (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax), Mumbai erred in law and on facts, in passing order u/s. 263 of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ITA, 1961) without appreciating that the scrutiny assessment order dated 20/12/2017 was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

2.

Learned Pr. CIT - 20, Mumbai erred in law and on facts i

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 →