9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (4) TMI 419 - HC - Income TaxExport - Special Deduction - The assessee company, engaged in the business of computer training, overseas consultancy and software development, filed its return of income under regular computation of income u/s 115JA of the Act. The Assessing Officer notice that though there was no profit available to the assessee, after setting off brought forward loss of the earlier years, the assessee had claimed deduction under section 80HHC against the book profit and offered the balance book profit for taxation under section 115JA. Therefore, the Assessing officer held that the relief under section 80HHC only be calculated on the actual profits not o the book profits. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal held that the computation of deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act was to be worked out on the basis of the adjusted book profits u/s 115JA only and not in the profit arrived at on the regular basis. Held that - Tribunal was right in allowing deduction u/s 80HHC on the basis of book profits u/s 115JA and not on the basis of eligible pofits u/s 80HHC as per normal computation.
Issues:
- Whether the Tribunal was right in allowing deduction under section 80HHC based on book profits under section 115JA and not on eligible profits under section 80HHC as per normal computation? Analysis: 1. Deduction under Section 80HHC: The case involved a dispute regarding the computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had claimed a deduction under section 80HHC against the book profit, which was contested by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal held that the deduction under section 80HHC should be based on adjusted book profits under section 115JA and not on the profit calculated under regular computation. This decision was challenged before the High Court. 2. Legal Precedents and Interpretation: The High Court referred to a previous decision of a Division Bench in CIT v. Rajanikant Schnelder and Associates P. Ltd. The court analyzed the judgments of the Supreme Court in Surana Steels P. Ltd. v. Deputy CIT and Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT. It was noted that the Assessing Officer's power under section 115JA is limited to examining whether the company's accounts are certified as per the Companies Act. The court emphasized that the Assessing Officer cannot go behind the net profits shown in the profit and loss account, except as provided in the Explanation to section 115J. The Tribunal's decision was supported by the court, which held that the computation under section 80HHC should be based on profits of the eligible category only. 3. Interpretation of Section 115JA and Section 80HHC: The court highlighted that the provisions of section 115JA are self-contained, and no other provision would have an effect on it. It was emphasized that section 80HHC specifies that only profits should be taken into account, not income. The court agreed with the Tribunal's reasoning that section 115JA itself addresses the adjustment of loss, depreciation, and carry forward of income. Therefore, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the conclusion reached by the Tribunal was correct and in line with the Supreme Court's decision. 4. Conclusion: Based on the legal analysis and interpretation of relevant provisions and precedents, the High Court dismissed the tax case appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision to allow the deduction under section 80HHC based on adjusted book profits under section 115JA. The court held that the computation should be limited to profits of the eligible category only, in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act and relevant legal precedents.
|
