https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410707 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the assessee, holding that the CIT(A) wrongly invoked Section 154 without identifying any factual mistake to deny exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal reaffirmed the assessee's entitlement to exemption under Section 11 and classified development receipts as capital receipts, supporting the assessee's position. The CIT(A)'s order was set aside, emphasizing that rectification under Section 154 can only address factual mistakes evident from the record, as per the Supreme Court's ruling in Venkatachalam (M.K.) ITO vs Bombay Dying & Mfg Co. Ltd. en-us Fri, 30 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Aug 2021 08:51:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410707 The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the assessee, holding that the CIT(A) wrongly invoked Section 154 without identifying any factual mistake to deny exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal reaffirmed the assessee's entitlement to exemption under Section 11 and classified development receipts as capital receipts, supporting the assessee's position. The CIT(A)'s order was set aside, emphasizing that rectification under Section 154 can only address factual mistakes evident from the record, as per the Supreme Court's ruling in Venkatachalam (M.K.) ITO vs Bombay Dying & Mfg Co. Ltd. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410707