SIR DORABJI TATA TRUST,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1932/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 March 2021AY 2015-164 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 noted that identical issues for a prior assessment year (2014-15) were decided in favor of the assessees, quashing the revision proceedings. Applying the same logic, the Tribunal held that the revision order for the current assessment year (2015-16) was also not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee trusts appealed against a revision order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner had set aside the Assessing Officer's order and directed a de novo assessment, alleging the original assessment was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue.

What were the issues?

Whether the Commissioner was justified in exercising revisionary powers under Section 263 when the Assessing Officer had conducted necessary inquiries and the assessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 143(3),Section 13,Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VIRTUAL COURT

Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM &

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal
For Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle
Hearing: 16/02/2021Pronounced: 08/03/2021

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

1.

These appeals in 1933/Mum/2020 & 1934/Mum/2020 for A.Y.2015-16 preferred by the order against the revision order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai u/s.263 of the Act dated 28/09/2020 for the A.Y.2015-16.

2.

The assessee has filed the following grounds of appeal in .

“1) The order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) ['CIT(E)'] u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') setting aside the order of the AO is void and bad ab initio, as the order of learned Assessing Officer ('AO') is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 2) The CIT(E) grossly erred in setting aside the assessment made by the AO u/s. 143(3) of the Act and directing a de novo assessment, by holding that the assessment order passed by the AO was without carrying necessary verification/enquiry even when adequate verification/enquiry was undertaken by the AO.

3) The learned CIT grossly erred in holding the assessment order to be erroneous even when the AO conducted necessary verification/ enquiry in the course of assessment regarding 13(l)(c), 13(l)(d), 13(2)(h) of the Act and on the issue of control over affairs of Tata Sons Limited and passed the order considering the details furnished by the Appellant 4) The CIT(E) erred in holding that the AO has failed to check whether various provisions u/s 13 of the Act are attracted in the case of the Appellant which has led to the Appellant to avail claim of exemption u/s 11 of the Act even when the AO has made due verification and exemption u/s 11 of the Act is rightly claimed by the Appellant. 5) Each ground is independent and without prejudice to the other. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdrawal or any of the Grounds of Appeal herein and to submit such statements documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing.”

3.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Both the parties fairly agreed that the very same issues were considered by this Tribunal in all these three appeals for A.Y.2014-15 in the context of revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, wherein this Tribunal had quashed entire revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act. We find that the decision rendered by this Tribunal for A.Y.2014- 15 are as under:-

a) Sir Ratan Tata Trust – dated 28/12/2020 b) Sir Dorabji Tata Trust – ITA No.3909/Mum/2019 dated 28/12/2020 to be read with corrigendum dated 30/12/2020 c) The JRD Tata Trust – ITA No.3738/Mum/2019 dated 28/12/2020 3.1. Since the revision order u/s.263 of the Act for A.Y.2015-16 was passed on identical facts and circumstances prevailing for A.Y.2014-15 in all the three trusts, the decision rendered by this Tribunal for A.Y.2014-15 vide its order dated 28/12/2020 for all the three appeals referred to supra shall apply mutatis mutandis to this assessment year also. The operative portion of the said order of the Tribunal is not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.

4.

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed.

Order pronounced on 08/03/2021 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.

More judgments on Section 263

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →