SMT. LORETTA MASCARENHAS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 15(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the issue was a legal one and did not require further factual investigation. It remanded the issue back to the CIT(A) to admit the ground and adjudicate it on merits, considering the Supreme Court's judgment.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed exemption for interest on NRE accounts, which was not considered by the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the ground as it was raised for the first time before him, ignoring a Supreme Court judgment.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in not adjudicating the claim for exemption of NRE interest income on the grounds that it was raised for the first time before him, despite relevant facts being on record and a Supreme Court judgment in support.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 10(4)(ii),Section 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT1,842 citing284 ITR 323 · 2006 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY
सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 30.08.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 09.09.2016 आदेश / O R D E R
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee on 4.4.2013 is against the order of the CIT (A)-26, Mumbai dated 18.1.2013 for the assessment year 2008-2009. In this appeal, assessee raised the following main grounds which read as under:- “1. The Ld CIT (A) was not justified in considering as taxable, interest on NRE accounts of Rs. 3,14,302/- which is exempt from tax under section 10(4)(ii) of the Act while passing his appellate order, dated January 18, 2013. Following the order of the Ld CIT (A), the AO while passing his order dated March 4, 2013 and in the notice of demand u/s 156 dated March 5, 2013, has also not given effect, to the claim of the assessee for treating as exempt, the said interest on NRE accounts.
The omission to claim exemption of NRE interest income in the tax return and in the assessment proceedings with the Ld AO was inadvertent and the assessee has filed application dated November 12, 2010 with the Ld AO for rectification of mistake u/s 154 of the act on which no order has been passed by the Ld AO till date. 3. The assessee has pleaded before the CIT (A) to allow the said exemption with detailed justification which has been turned down by the CIT (A).”
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026