C I T ALWAR vs. M/S GILLETTE INDIA LTD

ITA/864/2008HC RajasthanRJHC02017002200728 November 2018Author: MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,GOVERDHAN BARDHAR2 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, did not render a fresh decision on the merits of the appeal. Instead, the learned counsel for both parties agreed that the substantial questions of law on which the appeal was admitted had already been answered by a coordinate bench of the same court. This prior decision was rendered on May 16, 2017, in a batch of appeals, including D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.626/2008 – C.I.T. Alwar Vs. M/s. Gillate India Limited, which also dismissed those appeals. Consequently, the present appeal was dismissed in view of the aforesaid precedent. The specific findings and reasoning of the prior judgment, which would form the ratio decidendi for this dismissal, are not detailed in the provided text, other than that it dismissed a bunch of appeals on similar questions.

What were the facts?

This appeal concerns the Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar (the Revenue) against M/s. Gillette India Ltd. (the Assessee). The appeal was admitted by the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, on November 8, 2010, on two substantial questions of law. The assessment years are not explicitly stated. The core of the dispute revolves around the stage at which Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) credit can be set off against the tax payable. The Assessee contends that MAT credit is available at the advance tax stage, while the Revenue argues it should be allowed only after the total income is computed post the financial year-end, and after allowing credit for advance tax. The procedural history indicates that the appeal was admitted on specific questions of law.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the first stage of tax payable is advance-tax and the assessee is entitled to set off the MAT credit at this stage, whereas total income is computable only after closing of the financial year, not at the stage of payment of advance tax, therefore, set off of credit for MAT should be allowed after allowing credit of advance-tax u/S 219 of the IT Act, 1961? 2. Whether the Minimum Alternate Tax is at par with Advance-tax on TDS/TCS or regular tax as envisaged in the Act? Assessee's Contentions: The Assessee argued that MAT credit is available for set off at the advance tax stage. (Implied from the question framed by the court). Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue contended that total income is computable only after the closing of the financial year, and therefore, set off of MAT credit should be allowed only after allowing credit for advance tax under Section 219 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue also questioned whether MAT is at par with advance tax, TDS/TCS, or regular tax. Authorities/Precedents Relied On: No specific authorities, circulars, or precedents were mentioned in the provided text for either side's arguments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

219

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.864/2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar ----Appellant Versus M/s. Gillette India Ltd., 65-A, Industrial Area, Bhiwadi ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mrs. Parinitoo Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

Order 28/11/2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. This court, vide order dated 08.11.2010, admitted the present appeal on the following two substantial questions of law:- “(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that first stage of tax payable is advance-tax and assessee is entitled to set off the MAT credit at this stage whereas total income is computable only after closing of the financial year, not at the state of payment of advance tax therefore set off of credit for MAT to be allowed after allowing credit of advance-tax u/S 219 of IT Act, 1961? (2) Whether the Minimum Alternate Tax is at par with Advance-tax on TDS/TCS or regular tax as envisaged in the Act?” Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that both the questions, on which this appeal was admitted, stand already answered by a coordinate bench of this court vide judgment dated

(2 of 2) [ITA-864/2008] 16.05.2017 while dismissing a bunch of appeals leading one being D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.626/2008 – C.I.T. Alwar Vs. M/s. Gillate India Limited. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed. (GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J //Jaiman//43

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →