CIT v. Tulsyan NEC Ltd.

330 ITR 226Supreme Court of India2011#3046 most cited

What is CIT v. Tulsyan NEC Ltd. authority for?

A form prescribed under the Income-tax Rules cannot override the parent statute; the set-off of MAT credit balance against tax is not dependent on the computation of interest under section 234B.

39

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tulsyan NEC Ltd. · MAT credit · section 115JAA · section 234B · Income Tax Rules · parent statute · set off of MAT credit

Also reported as

196 Taxmann 1818 Taxmann.com 228
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 115jaamat creditsection 115jasection 115jinterest under section 234bsection 35amalgamationsection 32section 234bgross total incomesection 234section 115jb

Judgments citing CIT v. Tulsyan NEC Ltd.

Rashtriya Chemical Fetilizers Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Large Tax Payer Unit, Mumbai

ITA 2239/MUM/2013[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2018AY 1998-99
For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur and Shri Niraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena -CIT-DR
Section 140ASection 143Section 234BSection 234B(1)Section 234B(2)

…assessee should be taken towards tax and not against interests as done by the AO, that provisions of section 234B (ii) were not properly analysed and applied.He referred to the income tax computation of 19/01/2001 and relied upon the case of Tulsyan NEC Ltd.(330 ITR 226) and stated case relied upon by the F AA was not applicable to the facts of the case under consideration, that FAA had wrongly upheld the order of AO. 2239/M/13-Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. 4.1.The Departmental Representative (DR) stated that there was no provision of ad hoc payments as per Act, that payment was made under the head SA…

Nihilent Technologies P.Ltd., Pune vs. ITO, Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 2428/PUN/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 92C

…sing under the normal provision in the subsequent years. Hence, the MAT credit entitlement is nothing but prepaid Income Tax and hence, the same has to be reduced for determining the book profit. In fact, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tulsyan NEC Ltd. [330 ITR 226] has held that MAT credit represents advance income tax paid. Accordingly, the book profit should be reduced by an amount of Rs.52,65,565/-. 2.3] The assessee further submits that the amount of MAT credit entitlement is also deductible from the book profit in terms of clause (i) of Explanation l. It is submitted that clause (i) states that any am…

Ellenbarrie Industrial Gases Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-8(2), Kolkata

In the result, Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed, and ground

ITA 1687/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1687/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ellenbarrie Industrial Gases Vs. Ito, Ward-8(2), Kolkata Ltd. 34, Ripon Street, Kolkata – 700016. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaace 5770 E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri A.K. Bandyopadhyay, Fca Respondent By :Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit(Dr) सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-16, Kolkata, In Appeal No.352/Cit(A)-16/Kol/2014-15/W-8(2), Dated 13.07.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S154/143(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 16-04-2009. 2.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Lncome Tax (Appeals)- 16, To The Extent That He Has Confirmed The Order Of Ld. Lncome Tax Officer Ward 8(2) Kolkata, Is Contrary To Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Lncome Tax (Appeals)-16 Had Ignored The Fact That Assessed Tax For The Purpose Of Section 234B & 234C Of The Lncome Tax Act 1961 Was Computed Without Considering Available Mat Credit Of Rs.12,91,616/-Upto The Assessment Year 2006-2007. Computation Of Lnterest Under Section 234B & 234C Was Not Made In Accordance With Explanation 1(V) To Sub-Section (1) Of Section 234B & 234C Of Lncome Tax Act 1961;

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Bandyopadhyay, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 154Section 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.1687/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Ellenbarrie Industrial Gases Vs. ITO, Ward-8(2), Kolkata Ltd. 34, Ripon Street, Kolkata – 700016. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. :AAACE 5770 E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri A.K. Bandyopadhyay, FCA Respondent by :Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR) सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date of Hearing : 06/12/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/02/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The captioned appeal filed by the asse…

Surya Roshni Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6068/DEL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Oct 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh.R.K.Panda & Sh.K.N.Charysurya Roshni Ltd., Vs Dcit, 2Nd Floor, Padma Tower-I, Circle-I, Ltu 5, Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacs3558C (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Arvind Kumar, Adv. Respondent By Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 18.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 27.10.2017 Order Per K.N.Charythis Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.08.2015 In Appeal No.173/14-15 Passing By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [In Short “Cit(A)”]-22, New Delhi For 2013-14 Assessment Year, On The Following Grounds:

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 234Section 234B

…n earlier years also do not help the case of the appellant in view of the decision of the Apex Court (330 ITR 470) discussed above, holding that interest u/s 234B/234C is payable in respect of tax payable under MAT provisions.” 6. In CIT Vs. Tulsyan NEC LTd. 330 ITR 226, the Hon’ble Apex Court, vide paragraph No.6, held in unequivocal terms that “MAT credit is available for set off against the tax payable in succeeding years where the tax payable on income computed under the normal provisions of the Act exceeds the tax payable on book profits computed for that year [see s.115JAA(4), (5)]… …………… …………… pg. 6 Thu…

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)

…nds raised. 3.3 Per contra, the ld AR for the assessee submitted that there was no error in the order of ld CIT(A) on this issue as this issue is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tulsyan NEC Ltd., (330 ITR 226). The ld AR also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., Vs. DCIT (2016) 289 CTR 412 (Calcutta) and of the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of AMQ Agro India Pvt. (ITA No.666/Del/2014 dated 29/4/2016). 3.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully consid…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2010-11 The DCIT, Intas Pharmaceuticals Central Circle-2(1), Ltd. 203, Chinubhai Ahmedabad Vs Centre, Nr. Nehru (Appellant) Bridge, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad PAN: AAACI5120L (Respondent) Revenue by: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri P.M. Mehta, A.R. Date of hearing : 13-07-2017 Date of pronouncement : 26-09-2017 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This Revenue’s appeal for A.Y. 2010-11, arises from order of the CIT(A)-…

Financial Technologies (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 46, Mumbai

In the result appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7548/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…us and found that Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has recently decided the issue in 289 CTR 412 as under: ■ The view taken by the Tribunal is a correct view. The Tribunal had relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 226/196 Taxman 181/[2010] 8 taxmann.com 228. ■ The assessee had drawn inspiration from a mistake in the form of the income-tax return. Identical mistake was also involved in the case of Tulsyan Nec. Ltd. (supra). But that was a mistake with regard to the calculation of interest. [Para 11] ■ There can be no quarrel with the aforesaid view. But the sam…

Mantor Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 196/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ACIT CC 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACCP7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ ITA Nos. 194 to 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 to 2011-2012) Vs. ACIT, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free CC…

Mantor Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 195/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ACIT CC 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACCP7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ ITA Nos. 194 to 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 to 2011-2012) Vs. ACIT, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free CC…

Mantor Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 194/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ACIT CC 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACCP7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ ITA Nos. 194 to 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 to 2011-2012) Vs. ACIT, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free CC…

Mentor Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7512/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ACIT CC 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACCP7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ ITA Nos. 194 to 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 to 2011-2012) Vs. ACIT, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free CC…

ACIT CC 3(3) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Mentor Capital Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove, whereas appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7408/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Sandeep Gosainआमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Cc 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. & आमकय अऩीर सं./ Ita Nos. 194 To 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 To 2011-2012) Vs. Acit, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Cc -22 Press Journal Rd. Mumbai – 4000020 Nariman Pt. Mumbai- 400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaccp7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N.P. Singh, Cit Dr ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Mr. N. R. Suresh, Ar सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The A.Y.2010-2011 & The Appeals Filed By Assessee For Assessment Years 2008-2009 To 2011-2012, In The Matter Order Passed U/S 143(3)/143(3) R.W.S.147 Of The I.T. Act.

For Appellant: Mr. N. R. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri N.P. Singh, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 3

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA Nos.7408/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) ACIT CC 3(3) Vs. Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free Press Mumbai – 4000020 Journal Rd. Nariman Pt. Mumbai-400021 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACCP7995G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. AND आमकय अऩीर सं./ ITA Nos. 194 to 196/M/2015 & 7512/M/2014 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-2009 to 2011-2012) Vs. ACIT, Mentor Capital Ltd. 713 Raheja Centre Free CC…

Nalwa Sons Investments Ltd., Hisar vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal stands allowed

ITA 2459/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sh. K.V.S.R. Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dam Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 115ASection 115JSection 143Section 154Section 244A

…244A and should be allowed. 2. The CIT(A) having held that for the impugned year under consideration the credit for earlier years MAT payment has to be allowed as pre-paid taxes as decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tulsiyan NEC Ltd. 330 ITR 226, the consequential interest u/s 244A statutorily becomes due to the appellant which should have been allowed. 3. The CIT(A) has misdirected himself in deciding an issue which was not at all a ground in appeal. 4. The appellant contends that interest on refund which is due on pre-paid taxes should be allowed from 1st April, 2003 upto the date of g…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 38, Mumbai vs. Uniphos Enterprises Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 925/MUM/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainacit, Central Circle-38 M/S. Uniphos Enterprises Ltd. (Formerly United Phosphorous Ltd.) Room No. 32(1), Gr. Floor Vs. Uniphos Hosue, 11Th Road Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road C.D. Marg, Khar (W), Mumbai Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aaacu3440P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mukundraj ChateFor Respondent: Ms. Saisudha Multani
Section 11Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 2Section 234BSection 244A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member ACIT, Central Circle-38 M/s. Uniphos Enterprises Ltd. (Formerly United Phosphorous Ltd.) Room No. 32(1), Gr. Floor Vs. Uniphos Hosue, 11th Road Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road C.D. Marg, Khar (W), Mumbai Mumbai 400020 PAN - AAACU3440P Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Mukundraj Chate Respondent by: Ms. Saisudha Multani Date of Hearing: 14.03.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 16.03.2016 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order…

Orient Paper & Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 6, Kolkata

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

ITA 170/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…er deducting credit on account of minimum alternate tax from ‘gross tax payable’ and on this amount of ‘tax payable’, surcharge and cess are to be computed. However, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Tulsyan NEC Limited reported in 330 ITR 226 in the context of calculation of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C, it is immaterial that relevant form prescribed under the Income Tax Rules provided for set off of the MAT credit balance against the amount of tax plus interest. It was held that this method of working given in the relevant form was directly contrary to a plain reading o…

Hindustan Motors Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 6, Kolkata

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

ITA 171/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 14A

…er deducting credit on account of minimum alternate tax from ‘gross tax payable’ and on this amount of ‘tax payable’, surcharge and cess are to be computed. However, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Tulsyan NEC Limited reported in 330 ITR 226 in the context of calculation of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C, it is immaterial that relevant form prescribed under the Income Tax Rules provided for set off of the MAT credit balance against the amount of tax plus interest. It was held that this method of working given in the relevant form was directly contrary to a plain reading o…

The Commissioner of Income Tax -V vs. M/S National Fertilizers Limited

Appeal is dismissed

ITA - 532 / 2013HC Delhi26 Nov 2013
Section 115Section 115JSection 139Section 143(1)Section 156Section 209(1)(d)Section 234BSection 260A

…rest under Section 234B and C on the MAT credit under Section 115JAA of the Act. . The issue is covered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. (2011) 330 ITR 226 wherein it has been held as under:- . ?9.?We have discussed hereinabove the scheme of Section 115-JA(1) and Section 115-JAA. The entire scheme of Sections 115-JA(1) and 115-JAA shows that if an assessee is entitled to a tax credit as a consequence of the assessee making payment of tax under Section 115-JA(1) in the year one,…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bank Muscat S A O G

Appeals are dismissed

ITA/345/2007HC Karnataka16 Oct 2012

Bench: B.V.PINTO,K.SREEDHAR RAO

Section 260

…and equity. These appeals are coming on for final hearing this day, SREEDHAR RAO, J., delivered the following: J U D G M E N T In similar matter, the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Tulsyan Nect Ltd. reported in (2011) 330 ITR 226 has answered the question of law against the Revenue. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed. Sri K.S. Ramabhadran is permitted to file memo of appearance for Respondent within two weeks. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE NM*…

CIT vs. Bharat Aluminium Co Ltd

ITA/1890/2010HC Delhi11 May 2011

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA

Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234CSection 244ASection 254

…text requires us to give such a purposive meaning.” 14. The issue raised by the Revenue would no more survive and is put beyond the pale of controversy by a recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Tulsyan NEC Ltd. 330 ITR 226. In that judgment, it has been authoritatively held that MAT credit admissible in terms of Section 115JAA has to be set off against the tax payable (assessed tax) before calculating interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. Discussing the scheme of tax payable by the companies under MAT provision, the Court held that as per…