NCLAT: Consideration of Debt Restructuring by Lenders Doesn’t Bar Member from Initiating Proceedings  ||  Delhi High Court: In Matters of Medical Evaluation, Courts Should Exercise Restraint  ||  Delhi HC: Any Person in India Has Right to Legally Import Goods from Abroad and Sell the Same  ||  Delhi HC: Waiver to Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act to be Given Once Tribunal is Constituted  ||  Supreme Court Has Asked States to Regularise Existing Court Managers  ||  SC: Union & States to Create Special POSCO Courts on Top Priority  ||  SC Upholds Authority of CERC to Award Compensation for Delays  ||  SC: Arbitral Tribunal Has Discretion to Include in Sum Awarded, Interest at Rate as it Deems Reasonab  ||  SC: Cannot Use Article 142 to Frame Guidelines on Judicial Recusal  ||  SC: Satisfaction Recorder in One EP Won’t Affect Subsequent EPs for Future Breaches    

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (CENTRAL) - 1 Vs. Moon Star Securities Trading & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd. (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:2007-DB) - (High Court of Delhi) (11 Mar 2024)

Assessing Officer is not vested with an authority to travel beyond the net profit shown in the profit and loss account

MANU/DE/1857/2024

Direct Taxation

The present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ IT Act], at the instance of the Revenue, impugns the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"] for the assessment year ["AY"] 2011-12.

The limited controversy involved in the instant appeal which requires consideration pertains to whether the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act can be imported to Section 115JB of the Act, particularly in light of Clause (f) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB of the Act, for computation of MAT.

A bare perusal of the provisions would signify that, sub-Section (1) prescribes the mode and manner for computing the total income of the assessee under Section 115JB of the Act. However, Clause (f) of Explanation 1 only alludes to the amounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which Section 10 (excluding provisions contained in Clause 38 thereof) or Section 11 or Section 12 apply. Thus, the said explanation nowhere mentions or denotes any mandate to import the disallowance as per Section 14A of the Act for computing MAT under Section 115JB of the Act.

Further, in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was of the opinion that, the AO is not vested with an authority to travel beyond the net profit shown in the profit and loss account and the said jurisdiction is confined to the extent provided in the Explanation to Section 115J of the Act.

The scheme of Section 115JB, particularly in relation to Clause (f) of Explanation 1 therein, does not envisage any addition of disallowance computed under Section 14A of the Act to calculate MAT as per Section 115JB of the Act. Rather, both the provisions stand separately as no correlation exists between them for the purpose of determining the taxable income. The addition of the concerned disallowance made by the AO while computing MAT is dehors the provisions of the Act and hence, cannot be sustained.

The arguments raised by the Revenue are bereft of any merit and thus, the question of law which arose in the instant appeal is answered against the Revenue. Consequently, there is no reason to interfere with the decision rendered by the ITAT. Appeal dismissed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   PROVISION   APPLICABILITY  

Share :        
The limited controversy involved in the instant appeal which requi... For read more news from newsroom.manupatra.com"data-action="share/whatsapp/share" class="ic_wtsp-grid">

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved