NJ Jose and Company Private Limited v. CIT

321 ITR 132High Court2010#7852 most cited

What is NJ Jose and Company Private Limited v. CIT authority for?

Only deductions and adjustments specifically provided for in Explanation 1 to section 115JB are permissible when computing book profits for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. No further deductions or allowances are available beyond those stipulated.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Also referred to as

N.J. Jose and Company Private Limited v. CIT · section 115JB · Explanation 1 · book profit · permissible adjustments · Minimum Alternate Tax · MAT

Judgments citing NJ Jose and Company Private Limited v. CIT

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3805/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ed against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limited Vs CIT (2010) 321 ITR 132 (ker.). 23.3 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. The hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) held that while computing the book profit under the companies Act, the ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 AND ITA Nos. 85 2234/Del/2005 &…

Ircon International Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 705/DEL/2006[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ed against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limited Vs CIT (2010) 321 ITR 132 (ker.). 23.3 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. The hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) held that while computing the book profit under the companies Act, the ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 AND ITA Nos. 85 2234/Del/2005 &…

DCIT, Circle-11(1) vs. Ircon International Ltd

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2234/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ed against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limited Vs CIT (2010) 321 ITR 132 (ker.). 23.3 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. The hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) held that while computing the book profit under the companies Act, the ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 AND ITA Nos. 85 2234/Del/2005 &…

Ircon International Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 3804/DEL/2008[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ed against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limited Vs CIT (2010) 321 ITR 132 (ker.). 23.3 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. The hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) held that while computing the book profit under the companies Act, the ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 AND ITA Nos. 85 2234/Del/2005 &…

Ircon International Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, Range-11

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1825/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 80HSection 80I

…ed against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Vee Kay Lal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of NJ Jose and Company Private Limited Vs CIT (2010) 321 ITR 132 (ker.). 23.3 We have heard the rival submission and perused the relevant material on record. The hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Veekaylal Investment Company Private Limited (supra) held that while computing the book profit under the companies Act, the ITA Nos. 1825/Del/2005, 705/Del/2006 & 3804/Del/2008 AND ITA Nos. 85 2234/Del/2005 &…

Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 788/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

…ermissible adjustments as provided for in Explanatoin-1 to sec. 115JB are to be made ,as held by the hon'ble Karnataka High Court in N.J.Jose & I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 Tata Metaliks Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 Co. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 1143/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashish Agarwal &For Respondent: Shri Radhey Shyam, CIT
Section 115JSection 43B

…ermissible adjustments as provided for in Explanatoin-1 to sec. 115JB are to be made ,as held by the hon'ble Karnataka High Court in N.J.Jose & I.T.A No.788/Kol/2018 & I.T.A No.1143/Kol/2018 Tata Metaliks Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 Co. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the…

DCIT, Circle - 3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited, Kolkata

ITA 1481/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43B

…fore, this case does not help the assessee. Therefore, the A.O has rightly held that only permissible adjustments as provided for in Explanatoin-1 to sec. 115JB are to be made ,as held by the hon'ble Karnataka High Court in N.J.Jose & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the…

M/S Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-3(1), Kolkata

ITA 1153/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43B

…fore, this case does not help the assessee. Therefore, the A.O has rightly held that only permissible adjustments as provided for in Explanatoin-1 to sec. 115JB are to be made ,as held by the hon'ble Karnataka High Court in N.J.Jose & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the…

DCIT, Cir-3(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 478/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234C

…fore, this case does not help the assessee. Therefore, the A.O has rightly held that only permissible adjustments as provided for in Explanatoin-1 to sec. 115JB are to be made ,as held by the hon'ble Karnataka High Court in N.J.Jose & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the…

Tata Metaliks Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-3(2), Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 439/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234C

…fore, this case does not help the assessee. Therefore, the A.O has rightly held that only permissible adjustments as provided for in Explanatoin-1 to sec. 115JB are to be made ,as held by the hon'ble Karnataka High Court in N.J.Jose & Co. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132(KER) that no further deductions and allowances other than stipulated in Explanation 1 are available. The Honourable Apex Court on the interpretation of provisions has held in the case of Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. Union of India reported in [2012J 17 taxmann.com 202 (Se) as follows:- "71 We have to give effect to the language of the…

Income Tax Officer-11(1)(3), Mumbai vs. Savannah Real Estate Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed without costs

ITA 6310/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasiaassessment Year: 2013-14 Income Tax Officer-11(1)(3), M/S. Savannah Real Estate Pvt. Room No.201, Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 401/B, West View, M.K. Marg, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai-400 057 Pan: Aaics6458B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri B.V. Jhaveri, A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Aarjoo Garadia, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 16.01.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.02.2018 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Jhaveri, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Aarjoo Garadia, D.R
Section 10(38)Section 11Section 115JSection 250

…tate Pvt. Ltd. by virtue of sub-sections (4) of section 1 15JA and (5) of section 115JB. 8. Reliance of the learned standing counsel on the decision of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in the case of N.J. Jose and Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 321 ITR 132/[2008] 174 Taxman 141 is also distinguishable for the same reason as aforesaid. 11. In view of the above discussion, the substantial question of law is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The departmental appeal is dismissed without costs." 12. Therefore, the assessee is also entitled to exemption of Rs.50,00,000/- claime…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Metzeler Automotive Profiles India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5898/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Shefali Swroop, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 79

…f sec. 79 is confined to Chapter VI, whereas section 115JB is a code and, therefore, the book profits have to be computed as per the provisions contained therein. In this regard he relied on the decision in the case of N.J. Jose & Co. (P) Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT, 321 ITR 132. 11. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and have perused the record of the case. 12. We find that AO has not disallowed the assessee’s claim invoking section 79 but on account of no details being there of business loss in the return as well as in the computation of income. Therefore, we need not to go into this issue.” 12. Th…

D.C.I.T.CC - Xxviii, Kol., Kolkata vs. M/S Binani Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 144/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/ Shri K.V. Beswal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT, ld.DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…above said legal contentions were not considered by the Special bench. We notice that the Special bench considered the following decisions:— (a) Malayala Manorama Co. Ltd v.CIT [2008] 300 ITR 251/169 Taxman 471 (SC) (b) N.J. Jose & Co. (P) Ltd v. ACIT [2010] 321 ITR 132/[2008] 174 Taxman 141 (Ker.) (c) CIT v. Veekaylal Investment Co.(P) Ltd [2001] 249 ITR 597/116 Taxman 104 (Bom.) In all these cases, the Courts were dealing with the issue of inclusion of Capital gains in the computation of "Book Profits", but such capital gains were otherwise chargeable to capital gain tax u/s 45 of the Act under the normal pro…

NJ Jose and Company Private Limited v. CIT (321 ITR 132) — Cited in 14 Judgments | BharatTax