THE DCIT CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. AUSOM ENTERPRISE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The Registry has marked the appeal as delayed by 59 days since it was to be filed by April 2020 but was filed on 2nd June 2020.We have however noted that due to the pandemic of Covid-19, the limitation prescribed for filing appeals was extended till further orders’ by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 23/03/2020 in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.(s) 3/2020.And the same was ultimately extended upto 28th February 2022 in M.A No.21 of 2022 dated 10th January 2022. Therefore, there is no delay as such in the filing of the appeal.

As is evident the solitary issue in the present appeal relates to deletion of adjustment of Rs. 7,43,24,689/- made to the book profits of the assessee for the purposes of computing the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) leviable on the assessee in terms of Section 115JB of the Act. And the contention of the revenue, it appears from the grounds raised, is that the department has preferred further appeal on the addition made under the regular provisions. To understand the issue in a clear perspective, it is imperative to consider the facts leading to the present appeal.

As transpires from the orders of the authorities below, in assessment proceedings for the impugned year u/s. 143(3) of the Act, the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s. 10AA was denied by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) while computing income as per the normal provisions of the Act. The A.O. however failed to make necessary adjustment in this regard while computing the book profits of the Page No 3 DCIT vs. M/s. Ausom Enterprises Ltd. assessee u/s. 115JB of the Act. Accordingly, order u/s. 154 was passed and adjustment made to the book profit of the assessee by adding the deduction claimed by the assessee and denied in the assessment framed u/s. 10AA of the Act.

When the matter came up in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), he noted that the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s. 10AA of the Act under the normal provisions was allowed by the ITAT for the impugned year in its order passed in dated 15.10.2018. Accordingly he held that when the disallowance of deduction u/s. 10AA under the normal provisions did not survive, there was no occasion for making any adjustment to the book profit of the assessee which arose only any disallowance of deduction was there. Accordingly, he deleted the adjustment made to the book profits of the assessee of Rs. 7,43,24,689/-.

We have heard both the parties. We have gone through the order of the ITAT in the case of the assessee wherein the disallowance of deduction u/s 10AA of the Act, while computing income as per the normal provisions, was in challenge, in dated 15.10.2018. We have noted that at Para 9 of the order, the ITAT upheld the assessee’s claim to deduction u/s. 10AA of the Act amounting to Rs. 7,43,24,689/-. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) deleting the adjustment made to the book profits of the assessee u/s. 115JB of the Act which he has rightly noted could have been Page No 4 DCIT vs. M/s. Ausom Enterprises Ltd. made only if the disallowance u/s. 10AA of the Act under the normal provisions survived.

The contention of the Revenue raised in its grounds of appeal that the deletion of adjustment to the book profits was bad since the Revenue has not accepted the order of the ITAT and has preferred further appeal against the same, merits no consideration. As on date the status with respect to the matter is that the disallowance u/s. 10AA under the normal provisions has been deleted by the ITAT. The revenue is free to take any course of action as allowable under the law but that does not change the position on the issue as on date. There is no basis at all, for upholding the adjustment, until the order passed by the ITAT is reversed.