Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
G. S. Kulkarni, Aarti Sathe, JJ
Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai – Appellant
Versus
Impact Foundation (India) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of appeal challenging s263 revision on s11(2) utilization (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties contend on ao enquiry adequacy under s263 (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. ao conducted sufficient enquiry; order not erroneous (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. cit must verify ao's erroneous view post-enquiry (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. s11(3) taxability arises post-utilization period expiry (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. explanation 2 to s263 requires scn confrontation (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 7. s263 inapplicable if ao took plausible view (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT (PER AARTI SATHE, J.):-
1. This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant-Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), challenging the order dated 2nd January 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the “ITAT”), allowing the Respondent-Assessee’s Appeal, which was filed against the order dated 24th March 2022 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai”), thereby holding that the order passed by the CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai under Section 263 of the Act was not sustainabl
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
