Relief to JRD Tata Trust - ITAT upholds its Tax - Exempt Status

Last updated: 18 January 2021

Court :
ITAT Mumbai

Brief :
By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged the correctness of the order dated 29th March 2019 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) under section 263 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), for the assessment year 2014-15.

Citation :
ITA No. 3738/Mum/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI F BENCH, MUMBAI

[Coram: Justice P P Bhatt (President) and
Pramod Kumar (Vice President)]

ITA No. 3738/Mum/2019
Assessment year: 2014-15

J R D Tata Trust ……………………….Appellant
Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street
Fort, Mumbai 400 001[PAN: AAATT0165F]

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Exemption Circle 2(1), Mumbai ……………………Respondent

Appearances by

P J Pardiwala, Sr Advocate, along-with Madhur Agarwal, Sukh Sagar Syal,
T P Ostwal and Indira Anand for the appellant
Rajesh Damor (CIT-DR) and Brijendra Kumar for the respondent

Date of concluding the hearing : December 11, 2020
Date of pronouncement of order : December 28, 2020

O R D E R

Per bench:

1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged the correctness of the order dated 29th March 2019 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) under section 263 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), for the assessment year 2014-15.

2. Grievances raised by the appellant, which, being interconnected, will be taken up together, are as follows:

1. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) [‘CIT(E)’] erred in initiating proceedings under section 263 of the Act against the Appellant

2. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(E) erred in holding that the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) — 2(1) (‘the learned Assessing Officer’) was erroneous as due verification was not undertaken by the learned Assessing Officer.

To know more in details find the attachment file