TATA MOTORS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSTT. CIT (LTU)-1, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1643/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 September 2021AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that MAT credit under Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act should be computed inclusive of surcharge and cess. This decision followed precedents from the Tribunal's own case and High Courts.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Tata Motors Ltd., filed its return for AY 2015-16 showing a loss. The AO passed a rectification order u/s 154, granting MAT credit u/s 115JAA excluding surcharge and cess. The assessee contended that the MAT credit should include surcharge and cess.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the MAT credit under Section 115JAA should be computed including or excluding surcharge and cess.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 143(3),Section 115JAA,Section 115JB,Section 115BBD

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, ‘E‘ BENCH

Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora
For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap
Hearing: 04/09/2021Pronounced: 15/09/2021

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):

1.

This appeal in A.Y.2015-16 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Mumbai in appeal No. ITBA Appeal No. CIT(A)-1, Mumbai/10926/2018-19 dated 30/01/2020 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.154 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 25/01/2019 by the ld. DCIT(LTU-2), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

2.

The ground No.1 raised by the assessee is challenging validity of the ld. AO invoking jurisdiction u/s.154 of the Act. This ground was stated to be not pressed at the time of hearing and accordingly, the same is reckoned as statement made from the Bar and dismissed as not pressed.

3.

The ground No.2 raised by the assessee is only with regard to computation of set off of MAT credit u/s.115JAA of the Act i.e. whether it should be excluding surcharge and cess or including surcharge and cess.

4.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that assessee is engaged mainly in the business of design, manufacture and sale of vehicles and parts thereon. The return of income for the A.Y.2015-16 was filed by the assessee company on 25/11/2015 declaring loss of Rs.4507,15,19,875/- under normal provisions of the Act and book loss of Rs.3281,73,74,455/- u/s.115JB of the Act. Since, there was loss both under normal provisions of the Act as well as u/s.115JB, there was no occasion for the assessee to claim MAT credit u/s.115JAA of the Act. The ld. AO passed an order u/s.143(3) on 23/01/2019 determining total loss of Rs.41,81,8,25,612/- under normal provisions of the Act and assessed the income of the assessee from specified foreign company u/s.115BBD of the Act at Rs.1523,51,75,826/-. The ld. AO also computed book loss u/s.115JB of the Act at Rs.2956,86,17,512/-. After passing of assessment order u/s.143(3) of the Act dated 23/01/2019, the ld. AO suo-moto passed the rectification order u/s.154 of the Act r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 25/01/2019 wherein MAT credit u/s.115JAA of the Act was given by the ld. AO to the extent of tax payable excluding surcharge and education cess. The grievance of the assessee was that the ld. AO granted short MAT credit of Rs.30,39,41,737/- comprising of surcharge of Rs.22,85,27,637/- and education cess of Rs.7,54,14,120/-. Total MAT credit granted by the ld. AO was Rs.228,52,76,374/- instead of 258,92,18,131/-. This action of the ld. AO was upheld by the ld. CIT(A).

5.

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

6. This issue is no longer res-integra in view of the decision in assessee’s own case by this Tribunal for A.Y.2014-15 in dated 25/06/2021, wherein, it was categorically held that while computing MAT credit u/s.115JAA of the Act, the tax should be inclusive of surcharge and cess. Similar views were taken by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd., vs. DCIT reported in 395 ITR 291(Cal) and the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of DCIT vs. Scope International Pvt. Ltd., in Tax Case Appeal No.588 of 2019 dated 16/8/2019. Respectfully following the aforesaid decisions, we allow the ground No.2 raised by the assessee on merits.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced on 15/09/2021 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →