CIT (Exemption) v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority

412 ITR 521High Court2019#14183 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT (Exemption) v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority

DCIT, CC-I, Chandigarh vs. Valco Industries Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 574/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon'Ble Punjab & Haryana High Court? Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Is Right Holding Such Consequential Order As Void An Initio Ignoring The Facts That Order Passed By Ld. Pcit (Central), Gurugram U/S 263 Has Not Attained Its Finality? Iii) Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Right In Holding That Consequential Order Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 263 Of The Act As Void As Initio Without Giving Any Liberty To The Revenue To Revive The Proceedings Consequent To Any Directions Or Order

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 80I

…tion that the eligibility or otherwise u/s.80-I of the Act was never the subject matter of Appeal requires to be rejected...." 5.3 Similar view was held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT(Exemptions), Mumbai Vs. Slum Rehabilitation (2019) 412 ITR 521 (Bom) wherein it was held that when the AO has denied the claim of the assessee for benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act and the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the said claim, it was a case of merger of assessment order with the order of Commissioner (Appeals) and the Commissioner exercising revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act could…

Shri Bhawani Shankar Parashar, Indore vs. The DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 411/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

Section 263

…tter of the appeal before the appellate authority is beyond the powers of the Pr. CIT while invoking the provision of section 263 of the Act. It is relevant to refer the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT(Exemption) vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority 412 ITR 521 as under: Page 17 of 21 Bhawani Shankar Page 18 of 21 “9. This Court in case of Narendrakumari (supra) considered the principle of merger of the order of assessment into that of the order of the Appellate Commissioner. It was held that when the order of assessment merges with the order of the Appellate Commissioner in its entirety, the Commissio…

Smt. Niti Nitinkumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Emtra; - 3, Mumbai

ITA 284/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…circumscribed only as regards such matters that had been considered and decided in appeal, and not otherwise. Also, support is drawn from the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT (Exemption) Vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority (2019) 412 ITR 521 (Bom). In the said case the assessee had in its return of income claimed exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, the A.O vide his order u/s 143(3), dated 22.12.2011 after considering the activities carried out by the assessee and its legal status declined its claim for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) granted the benefit of exempt…

Shri Nitin Kumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Central-3, Mumbai

ITA 281/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…circumscribed only as regards such matters that had been considered and decided in appeal, and not otherwise. Also, support is drawn from the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT (Exemption) Vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority (2019) 412 ITR 521 (Bom). In the said case the assessee had in its return of income claimed exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, the A.O vide his order u/s 143(3), dated 22.12.2011 after considering the activities carried out by the assessee and its legal status declined its claim for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) granted the benefit of exempt…

Smt. Niti Nitin Kumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Central-3, Mumbai

ITA 280/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…circumscribed only as regards such matters that had been considered and decided in appeal, and not otherwise. Also, support is drawn from the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT (Exemption) Vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority (2019) 412 ITR 521 (Bom). In the said case the assessee had in its return of income claimed exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, the A.O vide his order u/s 143(3), dated 22.12.2011 after considering the activities carried out by the assessee and its legal status declined its claim for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) granted the benefit of exempt…

Shri Nitin Kumar Didwania, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT, Central-3, Mumbai

ITA 278/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh F. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 68

…circumscribed only as regards such matters that had been considered and decided in appeal, and not otherwise. Also, support is drawn from the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT (Exemption) Vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority (2019) 412 ITR 521 (Bom). In the said case the assessee had in its return of income claimed exemption u/s 11 of the Act. However, the A.O vide his order u/s 143(3), dated 22.12.2011 after considering the activities carried out by the assessee and its legal status declined its claim for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) granted the benefit of exempt…

Mahim Patran P. Ltd, New Delhi vs. Pr. CIT -2, Agra

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

ITA 195/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 143(3)Section 199(1)Section 205Section 263

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra Before : Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 195 & 196/Agr/2015 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Mahim Patran Private Limited, vs. The Pr. Commissioner, Kripa/Ritambhara Building, Of Income-tax – 2, Tribhuvan Coplex, Ishwar Nagar, Agra. West, New Delhi. PAN-AABCM0886E (Respondent) (Appellant) Sh. Gaurav Bansal, CA & Appellant by Sh. R.C. Tomar, I.T.P. Respondent by Sh. Sunil Bajpai, CIT/DR Date of Hearing 19.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement 02.08.2019 ORDER Per Laliet Kumar, J.M.: Present appeals are…

CIT (Exemption) v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority (412 ITR 521) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax