M/S. SOLAR INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCEL-1(2), NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 72/NAG/2021Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 September 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), DR. DIPAK RIPOTE (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue regarding the disallowance of secondary and higher education cess as a deduction is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the law in favor of the department.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a business deduction of Rs. 1,55,47,330/- for secondary and higher education cess. The lower authorities disallowed this claim by invoking Explanation-3 to Section 40(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was inserted retrospectively.

What were the issues?

Whether secondary and higher education cess is an allowable business deduction under Section 40(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, especially in light of retrospective amendment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ii)

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, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK RIPOTE

Hearing: 22.09.2023Pronounced: 28.09.2023

2018, arises against the CIT(A)-3, Nagpur’s Order No. CIT(A)- 3/10184/2019-20, dated 27.07.2021, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee’s sole substantive grievance canvassed in the instant appeal challenges correctness of the learned lower authorities action disallowing it’s business deduction claim of 2 I.T.A.No.72/NAG./2021 Rs.1,55,47,330/- representing secondary and higher education cess; as the case may be, u/sec.40(ii) of the Act.

3.

Learned counsel vehemently argued that the impugned deduction claim has been wrongly rejected in both the lower proceedings after invoking Explanation-3 to sec.40(ii) of the Act inserted vide Finance Act, 2022 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2005. We find the instant sole issue to be no more res integra once hon’ble apex court in JCIT vs., Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd., [2023] 450 ITR 164 (SC) has already settled the law in department’s favour to this effect.

Rejected accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.09.2023.

Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 28th September, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-3, 119, Aayakar Bhavan, Telangkhedi Road, Civil Lines, Nagpur. 4. The CIT (Central), Nagpur. 5. D.R. ITAT, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. 6. Guard File.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ii)

All 393 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →