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 366,459 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)
Read the full judgment

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

Bajaj Electricals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (OSD) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeals, of the assessee and Revenue, are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3892/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri M Balaganesh, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3892/Mum/2011 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2007-08) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3789/Mum/2012 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2008-09) Bajaj Electricals Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of 45/47, Bombay Lite Income Tax, (Osd), 2(1), बनाम/ Building, Veer Nariman Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Road, Fort Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacb2484Q आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 4516/Mum/2011 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2007-08) आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3811/Mum/2012 (यिर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2008-09) The Asst. Commissioner Of Bajaj Electricals Limited Income Tax, (Osd), 2(1), 45/47, Bombay Lite Building, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Veer Nariman Road, Fort Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacb2484Q

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Singh
Section 10(15)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Bom) (FB). We admit the ground adjudicate the same. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the 11. facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that this issue has been settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of cit vs. K. Srinivasan (1972)83 ITR 346 (SC), wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered the issue of super tax and surcharge and held as under: - “In order to determine the point before us, which is of considerable complexity, it is necessary to trace the concept of surcharge in taxation laws in our country. The power to increase federal tax by surcharge by the federal legislature wa…

DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Kalinga Hospital Ltd., Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 283/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-2015

For Appellant: Shri Amitav Satpathy, Manager (Finance)For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 115J

…dt.4.3.2016 that the term tax used in section 115JAA(2A) would include surcharge and cess. Going by the provisions of law, this decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad Bench is in consonance with the Hon'ble Apex Court's decision in the case of K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346. Respectfully following the decisions of the Hon'ble Allahabad and Calcultta High Courts and the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad, it is held that MAT credit would include education cess and surcharge. Hence, the AO is directed to allow MAT credit accordingly.” 5. Before us, although ld D,.R. supported the order of the Assessing Officer bu…

Soregam Sa, Gurgaon vs. DDIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 123/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesoregam Sa Vs Ddit C/O. Deloitte Haskins & Sells Llp, Circle-3(2) 7Th Floor, Building No. 10 Intl. Taxation, Block-E2, Civil Tower B, Dlf Cyber City Complex, Centre, Jln Marg Dlf City Phase-Ii New Delhi Gurgaon Aaocs3856K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

…Elektrobit Automotive GmbH vs. DCIT ITA No. 678/Del/2013 wherein the Tribunal held that education cess is only a surcharge as clarified by the Finance Act and surcharge is only a tax clarified by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan [1972] 83 ITR 346 (SC), therefore, education cess or any other surcharge should not be added separately to the tax rate as per the DTAA. The Tribunal relied on the coordinate Bench decision in the case of Osram India Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT (ITA No. 4052/Del/2015) to come to this conclusion. The Ld. AR also relied upon the following decisions: i. DIC Asia Pacific Pte. L…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Scope International Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 200/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Nov 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Shri Guru Bashyam, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. SP. Chidambaram, Advocate
Section 10A

…s that the CIT(Appeals) has no power to direct the Assessing Officer to verify. However, the MAT credit has to be verified before allowing the claim. The surcharge and education cess are part of income-tax as held by Apex Court in CIT v. K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346. Therefore, in exercise of power conferred on this Tribunal, the Assessing Officer is directed to verify the claim of the assessee and thereafter allow the claim with regard to MAT credit. In view of the above, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. 8. In the…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Jray Mcdermott Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1371/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 1371/Mds/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Jray Mcdermott Engineering Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. Services Pvt. Ltd., Rmz Millenia Room No. 512, 5Th Floor, Wanaparthy Business Park, 6Th Floor, Campus 3B, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai – 34. No. 143, Dr. Mgr Road, Perungudi, Chennai 600 0096. [Pan:Aabcj6787H] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Ruby George, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.10.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai Dated 05.01.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Revenue Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Directing The Assessing Officer To Consider The Payment Of Surcharge & Education Cess For The Purpose Of Mat Credit.

For Appellant: Ms. Ruby George, CITFor Respondent: None
Section 115J

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद" एवं "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" के सम" Before Shri Abraham P. George, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 1371/Mds/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. JRay McDermott Engineering Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(2), Vs. Services Pvt. Ltd., RMZ Millenia Room No. 512, 5th Floor, Wanaparthy Business Park, 6th Floor, Campus 3B, Block, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai – 34. No. 143, Dr. MGR Road, Perungudi, Chennai 600 0096…

DCIT, C-4, Ludhiana vs. M/S Aarti Steels Limited, Ludhiana

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1619/CHANDI/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate
Section 115JSection 234Section 234CSection 250(6)

…x levied. And it can therefore safely be concluded that taxes paid u/s 115JB include surcharge and cess alongwith the basic rate of tax specified in the section. We draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble apex court in the case of CIT vs K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346 (SC) holding that taxes would include surcharge and cess. The relevant findings of the apex court at para of the order is as under: “The above legislative history of the Finance Acts, as also the practice, would appear to indicate that the term "income- tax" as employed in s. 2 includes surcharge as also the special and the additional surcharge w…

DCIT, C-4, Ludhiana vs. Aarti International Limited, Ludhiana

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1525/CHANDI/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Oct 2018AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate
Section 115JSection 234Section 234CSection 250(6)

…x levied. And it can therefore safely be concluded that taxes paid u/s 115JB include surcharge and cess alongwith the basic rate of tax specified in the section. We draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble apex court in the case of CIT vs K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346 (SC) holding that taxes would include surcharge and cess. The relevant findings of the apex court at para of the order is as under: “The above legislative history of the Finance Acts, as also the practice, would appear to indicate that the term "income- tax" as employed in s. 2 includes surcharge as also the special and the additional surcharge w…

DCIT, C-4, Ludhiana vs. Aarti International Limited, Ludhiana

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1524/CHANDI/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Oct 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1619/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 The Dcit, Circle-4, बनाम M/S Aarti Steels Ltd., Ludhiana G.T. Raod, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Aabca4455D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Sh. Subhash Aggarwal, Advocate
Section 115JSection 234Section 234CSection 250(6)

…x levied. And it can therefore safely be concluded that taxes paid u/s 115JB include surcharge and cess alongwith the basic rate of tax specified in the section. We draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble apex court in the case of CIT vs K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346 (SC) holding that taxes would include surcharge and cess. The relevant findings of the apex court at para of the order is as under: “The above legislative history of the Finance Acts, as also the practice, would appear to indicate that the term "income- tax" as employed in s. 2 includes surcharge as also the special and the additional surcharge w…

Si Group India P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2350/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 115JSection 154

…o raised that tax includes surcharge, cess so far as section 115JB and 115JAA is concerned and placed reliance upon the decision in the case of M/s Eastern Jewels Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT (ITA ITA No.2348 & 2350/Mum/2017 3 No.163/Jp/2017) and CIT vs K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346 (Supreme Court). On other hand, the ld. DR, Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, contended that assessee filed two applications under section 154 of the Act and defended the impugned orders. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above arguments from both sides, we are reproducing her…

Group India P. Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu), Mumbai

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2348/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kochar

Section 115JSection 154

…o raised that tax includes surcharge, cess so far as section 115JB and 115JAA is concerned and placed reliance upon the decision in the case of M/s Eastern Jewels Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT (ITA ITA No.2348 & 2350/Mum/2017 3 No.163/Jp/2017) and CIT vs K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346 (Supreme Court). On other hand, the ld. DR, Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, contended that assessee filed two applications under section 154 of the Act and defended the impugned orders. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above arguments from both sides, we are reproducing her…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Saint Gobain Galss India Ltd., Kanchipuram

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 61/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.61/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-2011. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Saint Gobain Glass India Ltd, Of Income Tax, Plot No.A-1, Sipcot Industrial Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Park, Chennai 600 034. Sriperumbudur, Kanchipuram Dist. 602 106. [Pan Aabcs 4338M]

For Respondent: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, Adv
Section 115J

…ssessment year u/s.115JA(1) of the Act, and the amount of tax payable by the assessee in accordance with other provisions of the Act. The important word used is tax paid. As per the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan, (1972) 83 ITR 346, the term tax includes surcharge. Under Sub Section (5) of Section 115JAA, setoff in respect of brought forward tax credit is allowed for any assessment year, to the extent of the difference between tax on the total income and the tax which would have been payable under Section 115JA or 115JB as the case may be. ITA No.61 /2018 :- 3 -: The te…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Infastech Fastening Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2794/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.Awijit Rakshit, JCIT
Section 10ASection 115J

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम% BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2794/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Dy. Commissioner of- Vs. M/s.Infastech Fastening – Income Tax, Technologies India Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Circle-2(2), Plot No.2-14, Oragadam, Room No.512, 5th Floor, Chennai-602 105 Wanaparthy Block, 121, M.G.Road, Chennai-600 034. [PAN:AAGCL 5415 L] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Depart…

ACIT Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Saint Gobain Glass India Limited, Kanchipuram

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2549/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2549/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Asish Tripathy, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 115J

…y, Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that surcharge and education cess are part of income-tax in view of Article 271 of the Constitution of India. Placing reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in CIT v. K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346, the Ld.counsel submitted that income-tax includes surcharge and education cess. Therefore, when the income-tax was adjusted, the surcharge and education cess also need to be adjusted. Hence, according to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) by rightly following the order of this Tribunal in Saint Gobain Gyproc India Ltd. (supra), directed the Ass…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jhunjhunu vs. Shashi Kant Khetan, Jhunjhunu

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 926/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Raised An Objection Of Maintainability Of The Appeal Of The Revenue Due To The Tax

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (C.A.) &For Respondent: Smt. Seema Meena (JCIT)
Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(43)Section 40

…Industries Ltd in ITA No.2506/Mum/2015 vide order dated 31.05.2017 5.5 Recently in ITO vs. Shri K. Vivekanandan in M.P. No.220/Mds/2016 vide order/ dated 15.03.2017, the MA filed by the department has been rejected and the case of CI1 v. K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346 was also distinguished. 5.6 Also kindly refer Dalmia Cement (Bharat) ltd. v/s CIT (2013) 263 CTR 0308 (De) though rendered in the context of Sec. 43B yet is relevant because it has held that tax does not include cess and surcharge. Thus, the tax effect having been below Rs.10 lakhs, the Hon’ble ITAT has rightly held t the MA of the department wa…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1202/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1201 & 1202/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2012-13 M/S Chettinad Cement The Assistant Commissioner Of Corporation Ltd., Income Tax, V. Rani Seethai Hall, Iv Floor, Central Circle – 3(2), 603, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Aaacc 3130 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 115J

…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 autho…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1201/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1201 & 1202/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08 & 2012-13 M/S Chettinad Cement The Assistant Commissioner Of Corporation Ltd., Income Tax, V. Rani Seethai Hall, Iv Floor, Central Circle – 3(2), 603, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Aaacc 3130 A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 115J

…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 autho…

Bhagwati Oxygen Ltd., Kolkata vs. Dc/ACIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 240/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Nov 2017AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 240/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Bhagwati Oxygen Ltd. -Vs- Acit(Cpc), Bangalore (Dc/Ac Cir-8, Kolkata) [Pan: Aaacj 7788 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. ShahFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 115WSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(43)

…inate Bench of Hyderabad Tribunal relied upon by the Ld. AR (supra). We find that Hyderabad Tribunal after considering the decision of Delhi Tribunal (supra) and after considering the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan reported in 83 ITR 346 (SC) had held that tax includes surcharge and cess and accordingly the entire component of taxes including surcharge and cess shall have to be reckoned for calculating the MAT credit u/s 115JAA of the Act. We also find that the Hon’ble Apex Court had in the case referred to supra, had held that meaning of word ‘surcharge’ is nothing but an ‘additi…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S Mindtree Limited, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for asst

ITA 168/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boazthe Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Mindtree Ltd., Global Village, Rvce Post, Mysore Road, Bengaluru. . Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit Respondent By : Shri Tata Krishna, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 27-9-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-9-2017

For Appellant: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CITFor Respondent: Shri Tata Krishna, Advocate
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 2(43)

…ed for the credit of Rs.43,58,319/-, by calculating surcharge and education cess on the total amount of Rs.38,82,274/-." 8. This issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in judgment cited as Commissioner of Income- tax, Kerala vs. K. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346 and the operative part of the judgment is reproduced for ready reference as under :- The term "income-tax" as employed in section 2 of the Finance Act, 1964, includes surcharge and additional ITA No.168/B/17 5 surcharge wherever provided. The surcharge, the special surcharge and the additional surcharge form a part of income-tax and super-tax.…

The DCIT, Central Circle-2(1), Ahmedabad vs. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1740/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P.M. Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R
Section 111JSection 115JSection 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 8aSection 8cSection 90Section 91

…He has also contended that the Finance Act is a part of the Income Tax Act in which rate of income tax are mentioned in the chapter II. He has also placed reliance on the judicial pronouncement of the Hon’ble supreme court in the case of CIT vs. K. Srinivasan 83 ITR 346 wherein the Supreme Court held that surcharge is to be treated as part of the Income Tax. On the other hand, ld. counsel has supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and contended that surcharge are separate charge and further contended that in case view is taken that tax is inclusive of surcharge then assessing officer may be directed that the MAT c…

Young Presidents Organisation (Chennai Chapter), Chennai vs. DDIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1900/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1900/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Youngs The Deputy Director Of Income Tax Organisation (Chennai Chapter), V. (Exemptions) – I, 9, Cathedral Road, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 086. Pan : Aaaty 0382 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 164(2)Section 25

…reliance on the observation made by the CIT(Appeals). 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. Article 271 of v. Collector of Dibrugarh AIR 1992 SC 1264 and in CIT v. Srinivasan (1972) 83 ITR 346, while interpreting Articles 265 and 271 of Constitution of India held that surcharge levied under the Income-tax Act, is part of the tax. Accordingly, the levy of surcharge is upheld by the Apex Court. The assessee before this Tribunal admits that it is not entitled for exemption under Section 11 of the Act, therefore, it has to be necessarily…