Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENGALURU BENCH A, BENGALURU
Before: SHRI. JASON P. BOAZ & SHRI. LALIT KUMAR
M/s. Electronics For Imaging India P. Ltd, Kalyani Platina, 4th floor, Block-1, No.24, EPIP Zone, Phase-II, Whitefield, Bengaluru 560 066 .. Appellant PAN : AAACG6053E v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -2(1)(2), Bengaluru .. Respondent Assessee by : Shri. PADAM Chand Khindha, CA Revenue by : Shri. B. R. Ramesh, JCIT Heard on : 28.11.2017 Pronounced on : 06.12.2017 O R D E R PER LALIT KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT (A)-2, Bengaluru, dt.27.10.2016, for the assessment year 2012-13.
ITA.97/Bang/2017 Page - 2
Although the assessee has raised various grounds in its grounds of appeal, however at the time of argument the Ld. AR has restricted to ground no.4 only which is as under :
“Restricting the MAT credit available to the Appellant to Rs.35,42,341/- without appreciating that in the facts and circumstances of the case amount as claimed in the return of income was available as credit;” 03. In this regard the Ld. AR has submitted that the AO had disallowed the MAT credit of Rs.1,86,95,728/- with the following observation :
Disallowance of MAT credit: During the current year, the assessee has claimed total MAT credit of Rs. 1,86,95,728/-, the breakup is as follows: - A.Y. MAT Credit Set off claimed 2008-09 26,55,057 26,55,077 2009-10 17,89,634 17,89,634 2010-11 90,95,229 90,95,229 2011-12 1,30,48,841 51,55,808 TOTAL 2,65,88,761 1,86,95,728
On verification of the same, it is seen that the assessed income and corresponding tax calculated under normal tax provisions is more than calculation of tax on book profits for A.Ys. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2011-12 and hence there is no MAT credit available for the assessee. Further MAT credit available for A.Y. 2010-11 is Rs.81,74,978/- and not Rs.90,95,229/-. Hence, the MAT credit claim, is restricted to Rs.81,74,978/- only and accordingly the assessment is completed.
Feeling aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT (A).
ITA.97/Bang/2017 Page - 3
The CIT (A) in para 5.1 of his order held as under : 5.1 From the submissions filed, it is apparent that the remedy sought is that the Assessing officer should allow MAT credit as allowable after the appeals of earlier years are decided by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) and tax payable of earlier years is re-computed. I find that, as on date, there is no grievance. Therefore, no adjudication in appeal is considered necessary. The remedy sought that 'as and when favourable orders are received, these should be implemented' does not require any adjudication as orders of superior appellate authorities have to necessarily be followed by the AO. With this, the issue is treated as premature and without any merit to be sustained in appeal.
Before us the Ld. AR has submitted that the Tribunal had decided the appeals of the assessee for the AYs. 2008-09 , 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. Our attention was drawn to page 69 of the paper book containing the copy of the orders of the Tribunal, where in para 16, for the AY 2008-09, the Tribunal has held that no TP adjustment is called for. Similarly Tribunal in various other decisions had also held for other assessment years, no TP adjustment is called for.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. In our view, once the CIT (A) in para 5.1 while adjudicating the ground, has observed that the AO should allow the MAT credit after the appeals of the earlier years are decided by the ITAT, therefore AO should give effect to the order passed by CIT (A). It is clear from the perusal of the order for the earlier years that the Tribunal has categorically held that no ALP adjustment is called for and therefore ITA.97/Bang/2017 Page - 4 we deem it appropriate to direct the AO to give the benefit of MAT credit in all the four assessment years i.e., AYs. 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, after due verification and in accordance with law.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 6th day of December, 2017.