Case Law Details
Cricket Club of India Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai held that AO took the plausible view of granting the benefit of mutuality after due application of mind. Accordingly, revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 cannot be invoked merely because PCIT may entertain a different view in the matter.
Facts- The assessment of the assessee was completed by AO u/s 143(3). Subsequently, the PCIT noted that the Appellant’s claim that the Appellant is a mutual concern and therefore, its income is not chargeable to tax on principle of mutuality had been accepted year after year, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) while adjudicating appeal for A.Y. 2009-10 had concluded that the Appellant was not a mutual concern and the benefit of principle of mutuality was, therefore, not available to the Appellant.
Further, for A.Y. 2010-11, the assessment order was set aside by the then PCIT-1, Mumbai vide order, dated 30/03/2015, passed u/s. 263 of the Act on the ground that the same was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue as AO had granted the benefit of mutuality to the Appellant, whereas Appellant was not entitled for the same and therefore, Appellant’s income was liable to tax.
The PCIT was not convinced with the explanation/submission furnished by the Appellant and therefore, vide order dated 29/03/2016, passed under Section 263 of the Act the PCIT set aside the Assessment Order, dated 27/03/2014. Being aggrieved, the Appellant has preferred the present appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
