COURT: |
|
CORAM: |
|
SECTION(S): |
|
GENRE: |
|
CATCH WORDS: |
|
COUNSEL: |
|
DATE: |
(Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: |
December 17, 2010 (Date of publication) |
AY: |
|
FILE: |
|
CITATION: |
|
|
S. 115JAA MAT credit to be set off before computing advance-tax shortfall and liability for s. 234B/C interest
S. 115JAA inserted by FA 1997 w.e.f. 1.4.1997 provides that when tax is paid u/s 115JA or 115JB, a tax credit being the difference of the tax paid u/s 115JA/115JB and the tax payable under the normal provisions of the Act shall be allowed as set-off in the subsequent year when tax becomes payable under the normal provisions of the Act. The AO, in computing the tax under the normal provisions of the Act, took the view that though MAT credit was available, the same could not be deducted whilst computing the liability to pay advance tax and interest u/s 234B & 234C. The High Court disagreed with the view of the AO. On appeal by the department, HELD dismissing the appeal:
(i) The scheme of s. 115JA (1) and 115JAA shows that right to set-off the tax credit follows as a matter of course once the conditions of s. 115JAA are fulfilled. The grant of credit is not dependent upon determination by the AO except that the ultimate amount of tax credit to be allowed depends upon the determination of total income for the first assessment year. Accordingly, the assessee is entitled to take into account the set off while estimating its liability to pay advance tax. If this interpretation is not given, there will be absurdity;
(ii) The amendment to Explanation 1 to s. 234B by FA 2006 w.e.f. 1.4.2007 to provide that MAT credit u/s 115JAA shall be excluded while calculating advance-tax liability is to remove the immense hardship that would result if this was not done;
(iii) The fact that the Form & Rules provided for set off of MAT credit balance after computation of interest u/s 234B is irrelevant because it is directly contrary to a plain reading of s. 115JAA (4).
Note: Apar Industries 323 ITR 411 (Bom), Jindal Exports 314 ITR 137 (Delhi) & Chemplast Sanmar 22 DTR 241 (Mad) are impliedly approved
Related Posts:
- In Re: Guidelines For Court Functioning Through Video Conferencing During Covid-19 Pandemic (Supreme… Every individual and institution is expected to cooperate in the implementation of measures designed to reduce the transmission of the virus. The scaling down conventional operations within the precincts of courts is a measure in that direction. Access to justice is fundamental to preserve the rule of law in the…
- Raj Pal Singh vs. CIT (Supreme Court) For chargeability of income-tax, the income ought to have either arrived or accrued. In the matter of acquisition of land under the Act of 1894, taking over of possession before arrival of relevant stage for such taking over may give rise to a potential right in the owner of the…
- UOI vs. P. D. Sunny (Supreme Court) There shall be ex-parte ad-interim stay of the impugned judgment and order(s) passed in the aforesaid writ petitions and of further proceedings before the High Court(s), in view of the stand taken by the Government of India through learned Solicitor General, before us, that the Government is fully conscious of…
- Ramnath & Co vs. CIT (Supreme Court) The principles laid down by the Constitution Bench in Dilip Kumar (2018) 9 SCC 1, when applied to incentive provisions like those for deduction, would also be that the burden lies on the assessee to prove its applicability to his case; and if there be any ambiguity in the deduction…
- PILCOM vs. CIT (Supreme Court) The obligation to deduct Tax at Source under Section 194E of the Act is not affected by the DTAA and in case the exigibility to tax is disputed by the assesse on whose account the deduction is made, the benefit of DTAA can be pleaded and if the case is…
- H. S. Ramchandra Rao vs. CIT (Supreme Court) The substance of the admission is that the appellant was holding the post of Secretary of the Institution [Paramahamsa Foundation (R) Trust] until 1996 but he left the institution after new members were elected as the managing committee. That being the case, the question of appellant invoking the principle of…
Leave a Reply