9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (7) TMI 26 - HC - Income TaxAdjustment in book profit MAT Minimum alternate tax - Explanation (iv) to section 115JB(2) deduction towards profit exempt u/s 80HHC - CBDT Circulars of 4 May 1990 and 21 February 1994 ITAT observed that the deduction admissible vide Explanation (iv) to section 115JB(2) of the Income Tax Act towards profit exempt u/s. 80HHC has to be quantified with reference to the profits as per accounts duly adjusted under various clauses to the Explanation of Section 115JB and not with reference to the normal computation under the chapter Profits and Gains of Business or Profession Held that While the Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to scrutinize once again or to go behind the net profit shown in the profit and loss account he is well within his jurisdiction in effecting the increases and reductions as warranted by Explanation 1 to Section 115JB. As a matter of fact the Assessing Officer is duty bound to carry out the legislative intent by effecting the increases on the one hand and the reductions on the other as provided in Explanation 1. For the purposes of clause (iv) of Explanation 1 the extent of the reduction in respect of the deduction available under Section 80HHC has to be computed strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 80HHC - Tribunal was not justified decided in favor of revenue
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the deduction admissible under Explanation (iv) to Section 115JB(2) of the Income Tax Act towards profit exempt under Section 80HHC should be quantified with reference to the profits as per accounts duly adjusted under various clauses to the Explanation of Section 115JB and not with reference to the normal computation under the chapter 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession'. Detailed Analysis: The Question of Law: This appeal concerns an order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Year 2003-04, questioning whether the Tribunal was justified in its interpretation of the deduction admissible under Explanation (iv) to Section 115JB(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Facts: The assessee, involved in manufacturing and exporting meat products, filed a return of income declaring nil income after setting off unabsorbed depreciation. The assessee computed its book profits for Section 115JB purposes at Rs. 55.41 lacs and deducted Rs. 2.14 Crores as profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC. The Assessing Officer, however, adopted a higher adjusted profit figure and computed the eligible deduction under Section 80HHC at Rs. 90,46,441. The Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal upheld the assessee's method, stating that the computation should be based on net profits in the Profit and Loss Account, not the provisions of the Act. The Statutory Context: Section 115JB imposes a Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) on companies whose income tax payable is less than a specified percentage of their book profits. The book profit is defined as the net profit shown in the profit and loss account, adjusted by specified amounts. The controversy revolves around clause (iv) of the Explanation to Section 115JB, which requires reducing the net profits by "the amount of profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC," computed under specific clauses and conditions of the section. Submissions: The Revenue argued that the computation of profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC must follow the provisions of Section 80HHC, including the manner and quantum of deduction. The assessee contended that the net profits in the Profit and Loss Account should be the reference point for computing eligible profits for deduction. Legislative History: The provisions of Section 115J, 115JA, and 115JB were introduced to ensure that highly profitable companies pay a minimum tax. Initially, these sections did not provide for reducing the profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC from the net profits. Amendments later incorporated such provisions, specifying that the computation must follow the manner prescribed in Section 80HHC. Interpretation of Section 115JB: The Court emphasized that the legislative intent behind Section 115JB was not to confer additional benefits on companies under the MAT regime. The profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC must be computed according to subsections (3) or (3A) and reduced from the net profits. The Court rejected the assessee's submission that the net profits in the Profit and Loss Account should be used instead of the profits computed under the head of profits and gains of business or profession. CBDT Circulars: The assessee relied on two CBDT circulars issued in the context of Section 115J. However, the Court noted that these circulars cannot control the interpretation of clause (iv) of the Explanation to Section 115JB, given the material changes in the statutory language. Judgments of Kerala and Madras High Courts: The Court distinguished the present case from judgments of the Kerala and Madras High Courts, which interpreted Section 115J. The Court noted that the provisions of Section 115JB are different and require the computation of eligible profits under Section 80HHC to follow the specific clauses and conditions of the section. Conclusion: The Court concluded that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the deduction under clause (iv) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB should be computed with reference to the net profits in the Profit and Loss Account. The deduction must be computed according to the profits of the business under the head of profits and gains of business or profession. The question of law was answered in favor of the Revenue, and the appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.
|
