THE COMMISSIONER vs. M/S VIJAYA BANK

PDF · subscribers
ITA/142/2016HC KarnatakaKAHC01023668201622 January 2020Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that banking companies are not liable for Minimum Alternate Tax under Section 115JB of the Act. This decision was based on a prior judgment by the same court in a similar case.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed a High Court order concerning the applicability of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) to banking companies. The substantial question of law was whether banking companies are liable for MAT under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the applicability of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) to banking companies. Specifically, whether Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act imposed MAT liability on such entities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115JB,Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V. HOSMANI

ITA No.142/2016

BETWEEN:

1.

The Commissioner of Income-tax, LTU JSS Tower’s BSK III Stage, Bangalore 560 085

2.

The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU JSS Tower’s BSK III Stage, Bangalore 560 085 ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. K.V ARAVIND, ADVOCATE )

AND: M/s Vijaya Bank, Ho: Central Accounts Dept. 41/2, M.G.Road, Bangalore,- 560 001 PAN: AAACV 4791J …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. T SURYANARAYANA, ADVOCATE)

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 11.09.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.660/BANG/2010,FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Sri. K.V. Aravind, learned counsel for the revenue.

Sri. T Suryanarayana, learned Counsel for the respondent.

This appeal, under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) has been filed by the revenue which was admitted by a Bench of this Court by order dated 9.11.2018 on the following substantial question of law:

“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in holding that Banking companies are not liable for Minimum Alternate Tax under Section 115JB of the Act against the provisions of the Act?”

2.

It is a common ground that the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered by us vide judgment dated 16.01.2020 passed in ITA No.18/2014.

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the appeal is disposed of by answering the substantial question of law framed in this appeal in terms of the judgment dated 16.1.2020 passed in ITA No.18/2014.

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE Psg*

More judgments on Section 115JB

All 5,494 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115JB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →