{"id":42289,"date":"2024-05-04T14:27:04","date_gmt":"2024-05-04T08:57:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/ahmedabad-urban-development-authority-v-dcit-e-2023-201-itd-274-ahd-trib\/"},"modified":"2024-05-04T14:27:04","modified_gmt":"2024-05-04T08:57:04","slug":"ahmedabad-urban-development-authority-v-dcit-e-2023-201-itd-274-ahd-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/ahmedabad-urban-development-authority-v-dcit-e-2023-201-itd-274-ahd-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. DCIT (E [2023] 201 ITD 274 (Ahd) (Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>On appeal\u00a0\u00a0 the Tribunal held that\u00a0\u00a0 the PCIT erred in holding that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. That the PCIT had failed to appreciate the Gujarat High Court which had already decided the issue in favour of the Assessee by holding that the assessee was a charitable organization providing general public utility services within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. That, subsequently the Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court had also affirmed the view of the High Court. It is in this background that the Hon\u2019ble Tribunal conclusively held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. (AY. 2017-18)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-<br \/>\n High Court held  that the assessee to be a society providing public utility services within the meaning of section 2(15) which was eventually affirmed by the Supreme Court-PCIT was wrong to hold Assessment Order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.-Revision order was quashed.[S. 2(15), 11, 12 13(8), 143(3)]  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-42289","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-b05","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42289","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=42289"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42289\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":42290,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/42289\/revisions\/42290"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=42289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=42289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=42289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}