CIT v. K. Srinivasan

83 ITR 346Supreme Court of India1972#794 most cited

What is CIT v. K. Srinivasan authority for?

The term 'tax' includes surcharge and cess. Surcharge and additional surcharge are considered components of income tax, which can be levied as a basic charge, surcharge, special surcharge, and additional surcharge.

129

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

K. Srinivasan · 83 ITR 346 · surcharge · cess · additional surcharge · definition of tax · components of income tax · Section 40(a)(ii) · Section 115JAA · MAT credit · tax includes cess · tax includes surcharge

Sections most often in play

Section 40(a)(ii)Section 143(1)Section 80IASection 115JBSection 143(3)Section 164Section 167BSection 2(29C)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ib(2)section 24asection 10(4)section 40(a)(ii)section 8osection 80msection 3(b)section 2(11)section 115jaasection 44bbsection 42section 44b

Judgments citing CIT v. K. Srinivasan

SHARP GARUDA FARM EQUIPMENTS PVT.LTD,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1, , COIMBATORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3394/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. T.Mythili, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270Section 270ASection 270A(8)Section 274Section 37

…aced by the AO on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Travancore Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. (supra) is misplaced. The FAA has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan reported in [1972] 83 ITR 346 (SC). In the said case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court was considering whether surcharge and additional surcharge could be levied in accordance with the provisions of the Finance Act, 1963. The Hon’ble Supreme Court was not dealing with the issue of :- 8 -: allowability of deduction of education cess. Therefore, the reliance placed by the FAA on the s…

CAPGEMINI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES INDIA LIMITED ( SUCCESSOR OF ARICENT TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS LIMITED),PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1260/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Vyomesh PathakFor Respondent: Shri Vidya Ratna Kishore
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 155(18)Section 270ASection 270A(2)Section 270A(6)(a)Section 270A(7)Section 270A(8)Section 270A(9)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1260/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Capgemini Technology Services India Assistant Commissioner Limited [as successor-in-interest of of Income Tax, erstwhile Aricent Technologies Vs. Circle – 1(1), Pune (Holdings) Limited-since amalgamated, Plot No. 14, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjewadi, Phase III, MIDC SEZ, Village Man, Taluka Mulshi, Dist. Pune-411057 PAN : AACCK8280B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत…

UNIVERSAL TRADING COMPANY LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 223/KOL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115Section 115JSection 154Section 237Section 244ASection 250

…mployed in this provision refers to the difference between the tax paid u/s 115JB of the Act and the ‘tax’ payable on the total income under normal provisions. The term used is ‘tax’ and not ‘income tax’. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K Srinivasan (83 ITR 346) has held that, tax includes surcharge and cess and therefore for calculating the MAT credit under Section 115JAA of the Act, the entire component of tax, including surcharge and cess will have to be considered. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:- <<>> 5. Following the above decision, the jurisdictional Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata, in t…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

ITA 1517/JPR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dilip B. Desai, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 254Section 36(1)(va)Section 80Section 801A

…nts of Sec. 2(11) of the Finance Act 2004 would illustrate that the "cess" levied to garner funds to provide quality education is certainly a rate of tax, and is nothing but an additional surcharge. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346) elucidated the concept of surcharge and equated it with an additional tax. The Court referred to the dictionary meaning of the word "surcharge" to mean that "to charge too much or in addition" and also "additional tax". The Court, thereafter, held that income tax is tobe charged in four different ways- basic charge, surcharge, special surcharge a…

NIK FAMILY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 403/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainnik Family Trust Vs. Dcit, Circle – 23(1) C-7, Ishwar Niwas Sick Piramal Chamber. Nagar, Vp Raod, Girgaon. Pan/Gir No. Aadtn2244C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Dharan Gandhi A/W Shri Ashutosh Patare Revenue By Shri Avinash Karpe, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Impugned Order 24.12.2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’), By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Only Effective Issue Raised In The Present Appeal Regarding Levying Of Surcharge. In This Regard It Is Submitted That Assessee Is A Discretionary Trust, Eligible To File Return In Itr-5, The Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of 2 Nik Family Trust, Mumbai

Section 143(1)Section 164Section 2Section 2(1)Section 250

…is recognized as a separate category and its collection is treated differently than the income tax levied at the specified rates. In support of such proposition, he relied upon the following decision: Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kerala v. K. Srinivasan [1972] 83 ITR 346 (SC) 10. Referring to sub-section (3) of section 2 of Finance Act, 2023, he submitted, it only refers to charge of income tax for the purpose of section 164/167B of the Act and does not refer to the charge of surcharge. He submitted, insofar as, surcharge is concerned, the charging provision is specifically provided u/s. 2(1) of Finance Act, 2023…

MAHALAXMI CONSTRUCTION CO,MUMBAI vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGALURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4060/MUM/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 255(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4060/Mum/2024 & 4008/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2021-22 & 2022-23) Mahalaxmi Construction Co. Vs. Asst. Director of 101, Swarn Plaza, 90 Feet Road Income Tax, CPC Opp. IDBI Bank, Bhayandar Bengaluru West Dist: Thane-401 101 PAN/GIR No. AAEAM2787P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Lalit Munoyat Revenue by Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishanan, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing 21/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 23/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesai…

MAHALAXMI CONSTRUCTION CO,BHAYANDAR WEST vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BANGELURU, BANGELURU

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 4008/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 2Section 255(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4060/Mum/2024 & 4008/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2021-22 & 2022-23) Mahalaxmi Construction Co. Vs. Asst. Director of 101, Swarn Plaza, 90 Feet Road Income Tax, CPC Opp. IDBI Bank, Bhayandar Bengaluru West Dist: Thane-401 101 PAN/GIR No. AAEAM2787P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Lalit Munoyat Revenue by Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishanan, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing 21/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 23/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesai…

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD ( CORPORATE FINANCE DIVISION),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 6(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3762/MUM/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee vide order, dated 18/05/2009. 4. Not being satisfied with the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A), the Assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal. The Revenue has also filed cross-appeal challenging the relief granted by the Id. CIT(A).

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 43B

…ate to disallow deduction for cess. The Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2022 explains that cess imposed by the Central Government through the Finance Act is in the nature of additional surcharge (though named as ‘cess’). In the case of CIT Vs. K Srinivasan [1972] 83 ITR 346 (SC) Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that ‘surcharge’ and ‘additional surcharge’ are tax. By way of the deeming fiction created by Explanation 3 to Section 40(a)(ii) of the Act, term ‘tax’ is deemed to have always included ‘cess by whatever name called, on such tax’. The validity to amendment by way of which Explanation 3 to Section 40(a)(ii) of th…

CRYSTAL CROP PROTECTION LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 302/DEL/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 244ASection 254

…duced from the tax payable and thereafter on the residual amount, the surcharge and education cess should be levied. The Ld. CIT(A) dealt with the provisions u/s 115JAA and relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346)(SC), which held that the term ‘tax’ includes surcharge. The Ld. CIT(A) also did not accept the plea of the assessee regarding the part -B of the ITR-6 being revised from Assessment Year 2012-13, wherein, credit u/s 115JAA was placed after the gross tax liability including tax, surcharge and education cess, whereas, in the part-B of ITR-6 in…

DCIT,CIRCLE-5(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. DAHEJHARBOUR AND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2792/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Bandi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nayanjyoti Nath, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)

…Harbour and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. before the CIT(A) that the MAT Credit has to be allowed after adding surcharge and cess to the normal tax and MAT. The assessee further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346 (SC) where it has been held that the term "tax" includes surcharge and additional surcharge. Accordingly, the assessee submitted that the MAT Credit i.e. allowed to be carried forward should include surcharge and cess. The CIT(A) allowed the claim in favour of the assessee by holding that “Ground No. 1:- The appellant contested that the AO(CPC) di…

RSWM LTD,BHILWARA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 146/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita Nos.145 & 146 /Del/2021 (Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 69

…s of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and of co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal, we find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ’ble Apex Court of the country in the case of “CIT Vs. K. Srinivasan” (1972) 83 ITR 346; wherein the following questions came for adjudication before the Hon’ble Apex Court:- “ Whether the words Income tax” in the Finance Act of 1964 in subs (2) and sub-s.(2)(b) of s, 2 would include surcharge and additional surcharge.” 20. The Hon’ble Supreme Court answered the question in favour of revenue observing as underpin our judgment it is…

RSWM LTD,BHILWARA vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 145/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita Nos.145 & 146 /Del/2021 (Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 69

…s of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and of co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal, we find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ’ble Apex Court of the country in the case of “CIT Vs. K. Srinivasan” (1972) 83 ITR 346; wherein the following questions came for adjudication before the Hon’ble Apex Court:- “ Whether the words Income tax” in the Finance Act of 1964 in subs (2) and sub-s.(2)(b) of s, 2 would include surcharge and additional surcharge.” 20. The Hon’ble Supreme Court answered the question in favour of revenue observing as underpin our judgment it is…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI vs. RSWM LTD, KHARIGRAM

In the result, the Appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1929/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita Nos.145 & 146 /Del/2021 (Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 69

…s of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and of co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal, we find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ’ble Apex Court of the country in the case of “CIT Vs. K. Srinivasan” (1972) 83 ITR 346; wherein the following questions came for adjudication before the Hon’ble Apex Court:- “ Whether the words Income tax” in the Finance Act of 1964 in subs (2) and sub-s.(2)(b) of s, 2 would include surcharge and additional surcharge.” 20. The Hon’ble Supreme Court answered the question in favour of revenue observing as underpin our judgment it is…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-31, NEW DELHI vs. RSWM LTD, KHARIGRAM

In the result, the Appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1928/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Ita Nos.145 & 146 /Del/2021 (Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 69

…s of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and of co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal, we find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ’ble Apex Court of the country in the case of “CIT Vs. K. Srinivasan” (1972) 83 ITR 346; wherein the following questions came for adjudication before the Hon’ble Apex Court:- “ Whether the words Income tax” in the Finance Act of 1964 in subs (2) and sub-s.(2)(b) of s, 2 would include surcharge and additional surcharge.” 20. The Hon’ble Supreme Court answered the question in favour of revenue observing as underpin our judgment it is…

THE DY. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, CIR.-1(1), RAJKOT-GUJARAT vs. M/S JYOTI CNC AUTOMATION PVT. LTD.,, RAJKOT-GUJARAT

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 24/RJT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154

…lso provides that the tax include surcharge and cess and, therefore, credit and set off of MAT credit should be allowed inclusive of surcharge and cess. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan, 83 ITR 346. The Ld. AR further submitted that the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Tulsyan (supra) will not be applicable in the present case. The Ld. AR further submitted that rectification cannot be done in respect of prior period and there is no error in computation as one year was not included in education cess and surcharge. Assessment Year…

PEERLESS HOTELS LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-8(2), KOL, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 545/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 545/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Peerless Hotels Limited,..........................Appellant 12, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata-700013 [Pan: Aabcp9484D] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri B.K. Singh, Jcit (Sr. D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 07, 2023

Section 143(2)Section 14A

…s of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and of co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal, we find that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ’ble Apex Court of the country in the case of “CIT Vs. K. Srinivasan” (1972) 83 ITR 346; wherein the following questions came for adjudication before the Hon’ble Apex Court:- “ Whether the words Income tax” in the Finance Act of 1964 in subs (2) and sub-s.(2)(b) of s, 2 would include surcharge and additional surcharge. ” 20. The Hon’ble Supreme Court answered the question in favour of revenue observing as underpin our judgment it is…

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 152/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 80Section 80I

…Kol/2018 dated 26-10-2021) after considering the judgement of Bombay HC & Rajasthan HC in Sesa Goa (Supra) & Chambal Fertilisers (Supra) held that “Cess” is not an allowable deduction by relying on the decision of Apex Court in CIT –vs.- K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346 (SC). • Apex Court in CIT vs. K. Srinivasan (supra) has held that the surcharge and additional surcharge is part of Income tax. The aforesaid clarifications as stated in the Explanatory Notes to the provisions of Finance Act, 2022 does not hold good due to following reasons : • Decision of Kanoria Chemicals & Industries Ltd (ITA No. 2184/Kol /201…

TECH MAHINDRA BUSINESS SERVICES LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-13(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1256/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआअसं.1256/मुं/ 2022 (िन.व.2017-18) Tech Mahindra Business Services Limited. Ground Floor, Spectrum Towers, Mindspace, Chincholi Bunder Link Road, Malad West, Mumbai – 400 064. Pan: Aabch-8136-L ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 13(3)(2), Room No.229, 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai – 400 020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D,Mistri, Sr. Advocate With Shri Harsh Kapadia, Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Sr.Ar सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 28/04/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/07/2023 आदेश आदेश/ Order आदेश आदेश Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 30/03/2022, For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee In Appeal Has Raised Solitary Ground Assailing Disallowance Made U/S. 14A Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) R.W. Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (In Short ‘The Rules’) Amounting To Rs.80,08,567/-. The Assessee Vide Application Dated 13/09/2022 Has Raised An Additional Ground

For Appellant: Shri J.D,Mistri, Sr. Advocate with Shri Harsh Kapadia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…n’ble High Courts in the case of Sesa Goa Ltd.(supra) and Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. (supra) were contrary to the intention of Legislature and were not in line with the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan, 83 ITR 346. Hence, in order to make the intention of legislature clear and to make it free from any misinterpretation, Explanation – 3 was inserted retrospectively w.e.f. 01/04/2005. She further pointed that the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd.(supra) has been overturned by Hon’ble Supreme Court of…

M/S KERALA FEEDS LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT CIR (1)(1) & TPS , THRISSUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 942/COCH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Aby T.Varkey, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Varghese C.V., CA/ARFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 154Section 155Section 2(45)Section 245D

…ration of equity, but on principle inasmuch as surcharge and cess are both levies on the amount of income-tax, implicit wherein is the notion or understanding that it has not been already subjected to surcharge.True, as explained in CIT v. K.Srinivasan [1972] 83 ITR 346 (SC), tax andsurcharge/cess fall under the same legislative field, and thus have the same character, but, at the same time, the latter are levied on the income-tax, so that there is a basic difference between the two.As explained therein, the levy is for the purpose of the Union, not liable to be allocated to, or shared by, the Federation with the…

WARTSILA INDIA PVT LTD.,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 480/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT D.R
Section 14ASection 92CSection 92C(1)

…endered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Chambal Fertilisers & Chemicals Ltd. in civil appeal of 2022 (@SLP(C) No.7379 of 2019) and decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346 (SC). ITA Nos. 467 & 480/M/2020 22 M/s. Wartsila India Pvt. Ltd. 38. First question raised by the Ld. A.R. for the assessee to be determined by the Bench is “As to whether Parliament of India while inserting explanation 3 to section 40(a)(ii) by virtue of Finance Act, 2022 was empowered to remove the substratum or foundation?” of the judgment re…

Showing 1–20 of 129 · Page 1 of 7

CIT v. K. Srinivasan (83 ITR 346) — Cited in 129 Judgments | BharatTax