ACIT, CHENNAI vs. CHETTINAD CEMENT CORPORATION LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1201/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 December 2017AY 2007-083 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Surcharge and Education Cess form part of income-tax, citing Supreme Court precedent. Therefore, the MAT credit is applicable to the entire tax, including these components.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the order of the CIT(A) concerning assessment years 2007-08 and 2012-13. The core issue was whether MAT credit under Section 115JAA includes Surcharge and Education Cess.

What were the issues?

Whether Surcharge and Education Cess are includible in the calculation of MAT credit under Section 115JAA of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115JAA

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, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Hearing: 13.12.2017Pronounced: 28.12.2017

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

Both the appeals of the Revenue are directed against the common order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai, dated 20.02.2017 and pertain to assessment years 2007-08 and 2012-13. Therefore, we heard both the appeals together and disposing of the same by this common order.

2.

The only issue arises for consideration is whether the MAT credit under Section 115JAA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') is for the entire tax, including Surcharge and Education Cess? In other words, whether Surcharge and Education Cess would form part of income-tax?

3.

We heard Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee. Article 371 of the Constitution is provided for levy of Surcharge over and above the income-tax. The Apex Court in CIT v. K. Srinivasan (1971) 83 ITR 346 found that Surcharge, Special Surcharge and Additional Surcharge form part of income-tax.

Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that Surcharge and Education Cess levied by the Union Government on the income-tax form part of income-tax. Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.

4.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed.

Order pronounced on 28th December, 2017 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 115JAA

All 274 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115JAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →