HUMUZA CONSULTANTS,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT-19, MUMBAI

ITA 726/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 January 2022AY 2015-1635 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO had conducted necessary inquiries and the PCIT failed to demonstrate what further inquiries were needed. The Tribunal found that the gift of shares of a company in which the public are substantially interested is not taxable under Section 56(2)(viia) of the Act. Furthermore, the PCIT erred in directing the AO to examine Section 68 without providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard on this specific issue.

What were the facts?

The assessee received shares as a gift, which it claimed were not taxable. The Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (PCIT) initiated revision proceedings under Section 263, holding the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The PCIT directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to re-examine the gift and its taxability, including under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT was justified in revising the assessment order under Section 263 when the AO had made necessary inquiries and the gift of shares was not taxable. Whether the PCIT could direct the AO to examine Section 68 without affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 56(2)(viia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(8)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

For Appellant: Shri JD Mistry & Hiten Chande
For Respondent: Shri K.K. Mishra (CIT,DR)

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA 726/Mum/2021
SA 162/Mum/2021

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Prashant Maharishi (AM):

01.

This appeal is filed by Humuza Consultants (the assessee / appellant) against the order (impugned order) passed by Principal Commissioner of Income tax, Mumbai-19 (The Learned PCIT) under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (The Act) dated 09/03/2021. By this order, ld PCIT held that assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Act on 06/12/2017 by the Assistant Commissioner of Income tax 23(1), Mumbai (The Learned AO) is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Assessee is aggrieved and therefore in appeal before us.

02.

Assessee has raise

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 →