9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (2) TMI 111 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80HHC - Books profits u/s 115JB - Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that, disallowance deduction under Section 80HHC in a case of MAT assessment is to be worked out on the basis of the adjusted books profits under Section 115JA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is valid - Held that - In as much as the question of law raised in this appeal, is thus, covered by the decision of this Court in the decision reported in CIT v. RAJANIKANT SCHNELDER AND ASSOCIATES P. LTD. 2007 -TMI - 4745 - MADRAS HIGH COURT as well as that of the Supreme Court reported in AJANTA PHARMA LTD., v. CIT (2010 -TMI - 77381 - SUPREME COURT), there is no scope to entertain this appeal - Appeal is dismissed.
Issues:
Interpretation of Section 80HHC in a case of MAT assessment. Analysis: The main issue in this case revolves around the interpretation of Section 80HHC in a case of MAT assessment. The Appellate Tribunal had to determine whether the disallowance deduction under Section 80HHC should be based on the adjusted books profits under Section 115JA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The High Court referred to its previous decision in CIT v. RAJANIKANT SCHNELDER AND ASSOCIATES P. LTD., where it was held that the Assessing Officer cannot alter the profit and loss account prepared by the assessee as per the Companies Act while calculating the book profit under Section 115J. The Court emphasized that the computation under Section 80HHC should be limited to the profits of the eligible category only. The Tribunal's decision was upheld based on the non obstante clause in Section 115JA, indicating that it is a self-contained provision not to be affected by other provisions. The Court also highlighted that Section 80HHC specifies that only profit, not income, should be considered, and Section 115JA(3) addresses adjustments for losses, depreciation, and carry forward of income. Subsequently, the High Court noted a conflicting view taken by the Bombay High Court in CIT v. AJANTA PHARMA LTD., which was later distinguished in CIT v. AMBIKA COTTON MILLS LTD. by the same High Court. The Supreme Court ultimately settled the matter in AJANTA PHARMA LTD., v. CIT, where it was clarified that for determining "book profits" under Section 115JB, the net profits in the profit and loss account should be reduced by the amount of profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that eligibility and deductibility of profit under Section 80HHC should be considered together, emphasizing that Section 115JB is a self-contained code and the relief should be computed under Section 80HHC(3)/(3A) subject to specified conditions, not as a combined eligibility and deductibility criterion. Given the precedents set by the High Court and the Supreme Court, the current appeal was deemed to have no merit as the issues raised were already addressed in previous judgments. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed based on the established interpretations of the relevant provisions and legal principles. This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the issues involved and the legal reasoning applied by the High Court and the Supreme Court in resolving the matter related to the interpretation of Section 80HHC in the context of MAT assessment.
|
