MALLAK SPECIALITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2045/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 September 2023AY 2014-20154 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, following various coordinate bench judgments, held that Surcharge and Education Cess should be allowed as part of MAT credit. Consequently, the orders of the lower authorities were set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared income and claimed MAT credit. The AO reduced the MAT credit by excluding Surcharge and Education Cess, a view affirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee appealed this reduction.

What were the issues?

Whether Surcharge and Education Cess are to be included in the calculation of MAT credit under Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115JAA,Section 250,Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, AM & SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Milind Sahasrabudhe, CA, Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.09.2023Pronounced: 22.09.2023

Mallak Specialties Pvt. Ltd. DCIT-1)(2)(2), Unit 320, Mahavir Industrial Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Estate, Off. Mahakali Caves Mumbai-400020. Road, 5th Floor, Potia Vs. Industrial Estate, Mumbai- 400093. PAN No. AAECM0965D Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant/Assessee by : Shri Milind Sahasrabudhe, CA Respondent/Department by : Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 22.09.2023 O R D E R Per N. K. Choudhry, JM:

The Assessee/Appellant herein has preferred this appeal against the order dated 25.03.2023 impugned herein passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi {in short ‘Ld. Commissioner’} under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset we observe that there is 05days delay in filling of the instant appeal. The Assessee by filling its affidavit claimed that though the Assessee had filed appeal online on 25-05-2023, however under the bonafide belief that online filling is infact actual date of filling, filed the appeal in physical form on 31-05-2023, which resulted into delay of 05 days. The reason seems to be genuine; hence the delay of 05 days stands condoned.

3.

Coming to the merits of the case, it appears that the Assessee by filing its return of income on dated 29.11.2014 declared its income to the tune of Rs. 16,58,12,780/- and paid the taxes as per normal provisions of the Act, after availing MAT credit to the tune of Rs. 1,95,46,205/-. The said Return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on dated 14.05.2015 whereby the amount of Rs. 19,54,61,790/- was allowed as MAT credit.

3.1 Later on the AO vide order dated 07.07.2016 under section 154 of the Act, reduced the MAT credit as per section 115JAA of the Act from Rs. 1,95,46,205/- to Rs. 1,72,51,726/- by excluding the Surcharge & Education Cess from the MAT credit, by relying upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Richa Global Exports (P) Ltd. (2012) 25 taxmann.com 1 (Delhi) wherein the MAT credit was allowed to be calculated without taking into consideration Surcharge & Education Cess.

4.

The Ld. Commissioner more or less on the same reasoning as given by the AO, affirmed the action of the AO in excluding the Surcharge & Education Cess from the MAT credit amount.

5.

The Assessee before us relied upon various judgments of the Tribunal including in the cases of Consolidated Securities Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 3739/Del/2015 decided on 26.07.2018, Adurjee & Bros Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 997/Pun/2019) decided on 21.07.2022 and Sayaji Industries Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 2137/Ahd/2018) decided on 13.05.2021 wherein the tribunal analyzed the provisions of law and even the judgment in the case of Richa Global Exports (P) Ltd (supra) as relied upon by the authorities below and ultimately also allowed the Surcharge & Education Cess as MAT credit as per section 115JAA of the Act. Hence, respectfully following the judgments of the Hon’ble Tribunal, we are inclined to set-aside the orders passed by the authorities below. Consequently the same are set aside and addition made/disallowed is deleted.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed.

More judgments on Section 115JAA

All 274 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115JAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →