← All Phrases

“minimum alternate tax”

Special Rate ProvisionsSection 115JBSection 115JB222 judgments

The decision most relied on for minimum alternate tax is ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (82 Taxmann.com 415), cited in 789 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on minimum alternate tax

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · High Court
789
citing judgments

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT
255 ITR 273 · 2002 · Supreme Court
657
citing judgments

For the purpose of computing book profits under Section 115J, arrears of depreciation, including those arising from assets working extra shifts, are a necessary charge on profits if debited to the profit and loss account and are allowable as such.

CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd.
341 ITR 385 · 2012 · High Court
270
citing judgments

A provision for doubtful debts cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes.

PCIT v. Ankit
416 ITR 591 · 2019 · High Court
125
citing judgments

Capital receipts, including interest subsidy received under schemes like TUF, are excluded when computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. This principle also extends to the reduction of provisions written back from book profits for MAT purposes.

Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. CIT
327 ITR 305 · 2010 · Supreme Court
85
citing judgments

Section 115JB is a self-contained code for computing book profit, which relies on audited financial statements subject to adjustments under Explanation 1. Restrictions on export profit deductions under Section 80HHC(1B) for normal tax computation do not automatically apply when computing book profits under Section 115JB.

CIT v. Echjay Forgings (P) Ltd.
251 ITR 15 · 2001 · High Court
75
citing judgments

Wealth tax paid by an assessee cannot be added back to net profit for the purpose of computing book profit under section 115J or section 115JB, as wealth tax is not included in the definition of 'income-tax' under the Explanation to these sections.

Indo Rama Synthetics (I) Ltd. v. CIT
330 ITR 363 · 2011 · Supreme Court
74
citing judgments

For Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) under Section 115JB, the book profit must reflect the true working results of the company. Capital receipts that are not income cannot be included in book profit, and adjustments based on notes on accounts can be made to arrive at the real profit.

Rain Commodities Ltd. v. DCIT
41 DTR 449 · 2010 · ITAT
71
citing judgments

The ITAT Special Bench in Rain Commodities Ltd. held that certain capital receipts, such as forfeited share warrants, if credited to the profit and loss account, are liable for book profits tax under Section 115JB (Minimum Alternate Tax).

Judgments citing minimum alternate tax

National Dairy Development Board, Anand vs. The Dy.CIT, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 723/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

National Dairy Development Board, Anand vs. The Dy.CIT, Anand Circle, Anand

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 722/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Corporate Circle 1 1, Chennai vs. Hitachi Solutions India Private Limited, Kanchipuram

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

ITA 1715/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND\nSHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nआयकर अपीलसं./IT(TP)A No.: 17/CHNY/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2018-19\nHitachi Solutions India Private\nLimited,\nBlock 5, 10th Floor, 1/124,\nDLF IT Park, Shivaji Gardens,\nMount Poonamallee Road,\nChennai - 600 089.\nThe Deputy Commissioner of\nIncome Tax,\nVs. Corporate Circle- 1(1),\nNo.121, M.G.Road,\nChennai - 600 034.\n[PAN:AAACZ-1544-R]\n(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)\n(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)\nआयकर

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate by VirtualFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, C.I.T
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 153(1)Section 153(4)

against a tax demand of INR 1,94,87,302 by not considering advance taxes already paid, taxes deducted at source, credit for minimum alternate tax paid earlier and by undertaking certain other errors. 5. Other Grounds: The Ld. AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A

DCIT, Circle - 19(1), Delhi vs. Pc Jeweller Limited, Delhi

ITA 3084/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

1 ITA Nos.2581 & 3084/Del/2024 C.O. Nos.67 & 96/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cr Building vs. Pc Jeweller Limited, Delhi

ITA 2581/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

1 ITA Nos.2581 & 3084/Del/2024 C.O. Nos.67 & 96/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE Ms

Seabird Marine Services Private Limited, Jamnagar vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Jamnagar, Jamangar

ITA 83/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 83/Rjt/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Seabird Marine Services Pvt. Vs. Ltd. Office No. 309 & 310, Centroid Luxuria, Nr. Crystal Mall, Khodiyar Colony, Aerodrome Road, Jamnagar 361006 Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-1, Jamnagar, Aayakar Bhawan, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Jamnagar -Rajkot Highway, Jamnagar स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccs 9869 C (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By : Shri S. N. Soparkar, Ld. Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/04/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/05/2025 Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: आदेश / Order Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Dehi/ Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [In Short 'Ld. Cit(A)'], Dated 02.01.2025, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), Vide Order Dated 31.12.2019. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “All The Below Mentioned Grounds Of Appeal Are Independent & Without Prejudices To Each Other.

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 114Section 115JSection 143(3)

company after making all the adjustments on account of capital reduction and the same loss was taken, as a base to compute the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT)/ book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. The Ld. Senior Counsel also took us through the audit report of the Chartered Accountant, (vide

Atul Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 38/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Atul Limited Acit, Cir.1(1)(1) Atul House, Gi Patel Mark Vs Ahmedabad. Mithila Society, Ahmedabad. Pan : Aabca 2390 M (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar : Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)Section 92C

disallowance of Rs.8,26,43,616/-. This amount was also added back to the book profits under section 115JB while computing minimum alternate tax. 10. The DRP, in its directions, upheld the AO’s action in invoking Rule 8D(2)(iii), observing that the assessee’s passive investment activity could

ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand vs. National Dairy Development Board, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 757/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand vs. National Dairy Development Board, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 756/AHD/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand vs. National Dairy Development Board, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 755/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2011-12
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand vs. National Dairy Development Board, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 734/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2010-11
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

ACIT, Anand Circle, Anand vs. National Dairy Development Board, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 733/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2010-11
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: "Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Anand Circle, Anand vs. National Dairy Development Board, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 1059/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

National Dairy Development Board, Anand vs. The Dy.CIT., Anand Circle, Anand

In the result the appeal filed assessee for the Asst

ITA 1052/AHD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 May 2025AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

vide recent decision dated 06-09-2024 held as follows: “Section 115JB, read with section 2(26), of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Minimum alternate tax. Payment of Tax (Banks) Assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 Assessee-bank claimed that section 115JB would not be applicable in its case

Tupperware India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-25(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 462/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Jadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(3)Section 92CSection 92F

GROUNDS: 12. That the Ld. AO has erred in disallowing the provision for warranty created, while computing the income of the Assessee under minimum alternate tax provisions, by considering the same to be unascertainable in nature which is akin to a contingent liability as defined in section 115JB explanation

Tupperware India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-25(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2018-19 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2409/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. K. Jadav, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(3)Section 92CSection 92F

GROUNDS: 12. That the Ld. AO has erred in disallowing the provision for warranty created, while computing the income of the Assessee under minimum alternate tax provisions, by considering the same to be unascertainable in nature which is akin to a contingent liability as defined in section 115JB explanation

Ajay Bakliwal, Kota vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kota

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1275/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Sisodia, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 129Section 132(1)Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 2(22)(e)

opinion. The head notes of the decision is read as under- "Section 115JB, read with section 148, of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Minimum alternate tax Payment of (Reassessment) Assessment year 2005-06-Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 147/148 to assessee to reopen assessment on ground that assessee

M/S. Munjal Auto Industries Ltd., Baroda vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Baroda

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 784/AHD/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

whether the sales tax subsidy should be treated as a capital or revenue receipt, and its subsequent impact on depreciation computation and Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) liability under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. 2.1. The Co-ordinate Bench had earlier adjudicated

The DCIT, Circle-4, Vadodara vs. M/S. Munjal Auto Industries Ltd., Vadodara

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1383/AHD/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

whether the sales tax subsidy should be treated as a capital or revenue receipt, and its subsequent impact on depreciation computation and Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) liability under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. 2.1. The Co-ordinate Bench had earlier adjudicated

The DCIT, Circle-4, Vadodara vs. M/S. Munjal Auto Industries Ltd., Vadodara

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1382/AHD/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

whether the sales tax subsidy should be treated as a capital or revenue receipt, and its subsequent impact on depreciation computation and Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) liability under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. 2.1. The Co-ordinate Bench had earlier adjudicated