TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 546
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner challenges the variations made in the undated intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') by the respondent no. 1 for Assessment Year (A.Y) 2023-24, the order dated 17.03.2025 rejecting its rectification application under Section154, and the order dated 23.03.2026 under Section 264 of the Act rejecting the revision application filed by the petitioner. FACTS OF THE CASE 3. The petitioner is established under the Water Supply and Sewerage Board Act, 1978 by the Government of Gujarat and was approved for exemption under Section 10(46) of the Act for A.Y 2017-18 to A.Y 2021-2022 by the Notification dated 14.09.2018. 3.1 It appears that the petitioner filed its return of income for A.Y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rabh Soparkar at the outset while pointing out the impugned order passed under Section 264 of the Act by the respondent no.2 has submitted that the same is required to be quashed and set aside as the revision application filed by the petitioner specifically pointing out the factum of Rs. 7743.40 crores relating to the expenditure is entirely ignored and once the expenditure is given effect there would not be any question of any positive income and hence, the petitioner has precisely filed its return of income showing at "Nil". It is thus submitted that the entire addition of Rs. 57.54 crores has been made on completely wrong assumption and is illegal ignoring the expenditure of the petitioner which constrained the petitioner to file a recti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n and revision application is required to quashed and set aside. 6.1 It is pertinent to note that the respondents have not doubted the return of income filed by the petitioner wherein the petitioner has categorically shown Rs. 7743.40 crores as expenditure and accordingly declaring the income at "Nil". Curiously the respondents have asserted their action of the rejections of the intimation and issuance of the impugned undated intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act confining to two amounts, i.e. the receipt of Rs. 5640 crores and claim of exempt of Rs. 5582.77 crores and by taking the differential amount of Rs. 57.54 crores, it is alleged that the petitioner has to pay the tax. While calculating the difference of amount the respondent....