By Ajay R. Singh
Advocate
6 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - 16 vs. M/s. Universal Music India Pvt. Ltd [Income Tax Appeal No. 238 OF 2018; Date of order: 19th April, 2022 (Bombay High Court)]
S. 263 – Revision – Notice – the opportunity of hearing – distinguished Apex court decision in case of “CIT v/s. Amitabh Bachchan [2016] 384 ITR 200 (SC)”The Respondent had filed a return of income on 27th October, 2010 declaring income of ‘Nil’ for A.Y. 2009-2010. Subsequently, an assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act. Thereafter, notice under section 263 was issued by CIT on two issues, namely,
(a) disallowance of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) paid of Rs. 10,72,532/- included in miscellaneous expenses and not allowed by the Assessing Officer and
(b) provision of Rs. 1,40,98,685/- in respect of slow moving and obsolete inventories.
The CIT directed Assessing Officer by an order dated 20th March, 2013 to make enquiry and examine the two issues and a third issue being particulars of payments made to persons specified under Section 40A(2)(b) of the Act of Rs. 7,00,22,680 allowed in the assessment order. The assessment order was set aside on this issue and to be examined afresh.
Aggrieved by the order dated 20th March, 2013 passed by CIT, Assessee filed an Appeal before ITAT. ITAT by an order dated 27th April, 2016 allowed the Appeal of the Assessee.
On the issue of payments made to persons spe
