Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD
Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.378/Hyd/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mylan Laboratories Vs. DCIT, Limited, (formerly Matrix Circle-16(2), Laboratories Limited), Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No.564/A/22, Road Hyderabad. No.92, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 500 033. PAN: AADCM 3491 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri K.A. Sai Prasad Revenue by: Smt. Amisha S Gupt & Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 26/09/2019 Date of pronouncement: 04/10/2019 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. DCIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad, dated 22/12/2017 passed U/s. 154 r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the assessment year 2009- 10.
The assessee has raised several grounds in its appeal however, the crux of the issue that is argued before us is that
the Ld AO has erred in disallowing MAT credit entitlement for the relevant assessment year 2009-10.
The brief facts of the issue are that while passing order U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 92CA r.w.s 144C(5) of the Act, dated 30/01/2014 MAT credit of Rs. 7,59,69,174/- pertaining to AY 2007-08 and 2008-09 was erroneously granted. Subsequently, while giving effect to the order of the ITAT dated 31/3/2017 also for the relevant assessment year the same error of granting MAT credit of Rs. 7,59,69,174/- remained uncured. Thereafter, when the error was unearthed by the Revenue, notice U/s. 154 was issued to the assessee on 20/07/2017 in order to rectify the mistake. In response, the assessee had submitted vide reply dated 29/08/2017 that the addition made for the AY 2007-08 and 2008-09 was on account of disallowance U/s.10B of the Act against which appeals are pending before the Tribunal. The Ld. DCIT thereafter held that MAT credit cannot be granted for the relevant assessment year 2009-10 based on the argument that a favourable judgment is expected for granting of deduction U/s. 10B of the Act and accordingly computed the tax payable.
On perusing the above facts, we do not find any mistake that is apparent in the order of the Ld. DCIT wherein he has held that MAT credit cannot be granted based on the mere argument
that a favourable judgment is expected for granting deduction U/s. 10B of the Act by the appellate Authority. However, it is needless to mention that it is mandatory for the Revenue Authority to pass appropriate consequential order / orders for all the relevant assessment years, if any order is passed in favour of the assessee for granting deduction U/s. 10B of the Act by the appellate Authority / Authorities.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the open Court on 04th October, 2019.
Sd/- Sd/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 04th October, 2019 OKK Copy to:- 1) Mylan Laboratories Limited, Plot No.564/A/22, Road No.92, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad – 034. 2) DCIT, Circle-16(2), IT Towers, Hyderabad. 3) Dispute Resolution Panel, Hyderabad 4) The CIT-IV, Hyderabad 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File