2011 (6) TMI 125 - HC - Income Tax

Interest u/s.234B - MAT credit - Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to recompute interest u/s.234B after giving credit of MAT - Held that - Parliament amended Explanation 1 to Section 234B by Finance Act, 2006 w.e.f. 1.4.2007 to provide along with tax deducted or collected at source, MAT credit under Section 115JAA also to be excluded while calculating assessed tax - As per decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. 2010 -TMI - 78806 - Supreme Court of India ,decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to order under Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2001-02; Substantial question of law regarding computation of interest u/s.234B after MAT credit.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the order made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Year 2001-02. The substantial question of law formulated was whether the Tribunal was correct in directing the Assessing Officer to recompute interest u/s.234B after giving credit of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT).

2. The respondent referred to a Supreme Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. The Supreme Court held that MAT credit should be excluded while calculating assessed tax for advance tax purposes. The Court highlighted the hardship caused by the omission to consider MAT credit for advance tax calculations and the subsequent amendment to rectify this.

3. The appellant's advocate did not dispute the legal position stated by the respondent. The Court noted that the issue was similar to the one decided by the Supreme Court in the Tulsyan Nec Ltd. case. The Supreme Court's decision favored the assessee and held that MAT credit should be excluded while computing advance tax liability.

4. The Court concluded that the controversy in the present case was settled by the Supreme Court's decision in Tulsyan Nec Ltd. The Tribunal's direction to recompute interest under section 234B after considering MAT credit was upheld as legally correct.

5. In line with the Supreme Court's decision, the Court affirmed that the Tribunal was right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to recompute interest under section 234B after giving credit of MAT. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.