← All Phrases

“book profits”

Special Rate ProvisionsSection 115JBSection 115JB1,713 judgments

The decision most relied on for book profits is Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (328 ITR 81), cited in 1,183 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on book profits

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
165 ITD 27 · 2017 · ITAT
882
citing judgments

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
372 ITR 694 · 2015 · High Court
803
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee. This principle also applies when computing book profits under section 115JB.

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.

Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT
82 ITR 363 · 1971 · Supreme Court
654
citing judgments

Tax liability for an item of income or expenditure is determined solely by the provisions of the Income-tax Act. Entries in an assessee's books of account are not conclusive and do not govern the taxability or deductibility of an item, as the legal rights and obligations under the Act prevail.

CIT v. President Industries
258 ITR 654 · 2002 · High Court
471
citing judgments

When books of account are rejected and unaccounted sales or receipts are discovered, the income addition is restricted to the net profit element embedded in these undisclosed transactions, not the entire sale proceeds or receipts, especially if corresponding purchases are not proven to be outside the books.

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.

Judgments citing book profits

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 1500/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(3), M/S. Trent Ltd., Room No.552, Bombay House, 24, 5Th Floor, Vs. Homi Mody Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Marg, Pan: Aaacl 1838J Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Trent Ltd., Acit(Osd) 2(3) / Bombay House, Ito, Ward-2(3)(3), 2Nd Floor, 24, Room No.556, Vs. Homi Mody Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Road, Pan: Aaacl 1838J Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, D.R
Section 35DSection 36

Assessing Officer in making upward adjustment of disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, while computing ‘book profit’ under section 115JB of the Act. 9 ITA No.2509/M/2012 & ors. M/s. Trent Ltd. Additional Ground 2: On the facts and in the circumstances ... Rule 3D of the Rules does not represent actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income,, the same should not be added back while computing 'book profit’ under section 115JB of the Act”. 12. The Ld. CIT(A) made upward adjustment of disallowance made by the assessee computed under section

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) 2(3), Mumbai

ITA 3423/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(3), M/S. Trent Ltd., Room No.552, Bombay House, 24, 5Th Floor, Vs. Homi Mody Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Marg, Pan: Aaacl 1838J Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Trent Ltd., Acit(Osd) 2(3) / Bombay House, Ito, Ward-2(3)(3), 2Nd Floor, 24, Room No.556, Vs. Homi Mody Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Road, Pan: Aaacl 1838J Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, D.R
Section 35DSection 36

Assessing Officer in making upward adjustment of disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, while computing ‘book profit’ under section 115JB of the Act. 9 ITA No.2509/M/2012 & ors. M/s. Trent Ltd. Additional Ground 2: On the facts and in the circumstances ... Rule 3D of the Rules does not represent actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income,, the same should not be added back while computing 'book profit’ under section 115JB of the Act”. 12. The Ld. CIT(A) made upward adjustment of disallowance made by the assessee computed under section

A.C.I.T. 2(3), Mumbai vs. Trent Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 2509/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Mar 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(3), M/S. Trent Ltd., Room No.552, Bombay House, 24, 5Th Floor, Vs. Homi Mody Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Marg, Pan: Aaacl 1838J Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Trent Ltd., Acit(Osd) 2(3) / Bombay House, Ito, Ward-2(3)(3), 2Nd Floor, 24, Room No.556, Vs. Homi Mody Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Road, Pan: Aaacl 1838J Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.K. Bagchi, D.R
Section 35DSection 36

Assessing Officer in making upward adjustment of disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, while computing ‘book profit’ under section 115JB of the Act. 9 ITA No.2509/M/2012 & ors. M/s. Trent Ltd. Additional Ground 2: On the facts and in the circumstances ... Rule 3D of the Rules does not represent actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income,, the same should not be added back while computing 'book profit’ under section 115JB of the Act”. 12. The Ld. CIT(A) made upward adjustment of disallowance made by the assessee computed under section

M/S Lenovo India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 2833/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Mar 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CA
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

that the balance amount was suo-moto disallowed as per the provisions of section 43B(f) of the Act. 6. Additions to book profits under section 115JB of the Act 6.1 Addition of provision for warranty to the book profits 6.1.1 The Honorable DRP and the learned AO have erred ... adding back the warranty provision created during the relevant AY amounting to INR 13,40,69,800 to the book profit of the Appellant. 6.1.2 The Honorable DRP and the learned AO have erred in law by not following the order of the Honorable ITAT in the Appellant

Toyota Industries Engine India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 355/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A Nos.355, 2127/Bang/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 It(Tp)A No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Toyota Industries Engine India Dcit, 355/Bang/2016 Private Limited, Circle – 4(1)(1), (Formerly Known As Kirloskar Toyota Bengaluru. Textile Machinery Private Limited), Plot No.9, Phase – 2, Jigani Industrial Area, Jigani, Bengaluru-560 105. Pan : Aaack 7425 Q -Do- Dcit, 2127/Bang/2016 Circle – 7(1)(1), Bengaluru.

For Appellant: Shri. Ajit Tolani/Darpan Kirpalani, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Roumuan Paite, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)

provision for bonus amounting to Rs 4,187,434 by treating the same as unascertained liability, while computing the 'book profits' under section 115JB of the Act 12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Panel erred in not considering the submissions ... allowing the deduction for long service award paid of Rs. 140,000 and bonus paid amounting to Rs. 3,051,641, while computing the 'book profits' under section 115JB of the Act. 14. That the Learned AO /Learned Panel erred in levying interest under section 234B amounting

M/S.Toyota Industries Engine India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2127/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranit(Tp)A Nos.355, 2127/Bang/2016 Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2012-13 It(Tp)A No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Toyota Industries Engine India Dcit, 355/Bang/2016 Private Limited, Circle – 4(1)(1), (Formerly Known As Kirloskar Toyota Bengaluru. Textile Machinery Private Limited), Plot No.9, Phase – 2, Jigani Industrial Area, Jigani, Bengaluru-560 105. Pan : Aaack 7425 Q -Do- Dcit, 2127/Bang/2016 Circle – 7(1)(1), Bengaluru.

For Appellant: Shri. Ajit Tolani/Darpan Kirpalani, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Roumuan Paite, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)

provision for bonus amounting to Rs 4,187,434 by treating the same as unascertained liability, while computing the 'book profits' under section 115JB of the Act 12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Panel erred in not considering the submissions ... allowing the deduction for long service award paid of Rs. 140,000 and bonus paid amounting to Rs. 3,051,641, while computing the 'book profits' under section 115JB of the Act. 14. That the Learned AO /Learned Panel erred in levying interest under section 234B amounting

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 6(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 350/BANG/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Ltd., Wing South Portion, Cristu Complex, 5Th Income Tax, Circle – 6(1)(2), Floor, No.41/7, Lavelle Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru–560 001. Pan : Aaccs 0881 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Ravi Tulsiyan, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 14.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : .03.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. Ravi Tulsiyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80

issue is dismissed. 9. The next issue is whether income in the form of carbon credits should be excluded for the purpose of computing books profits under section 115JB of the Act, also. On this issue, the CIT(A) agreed that the contention of the assessee that when an item ... income is not chargeable to tax at all the same cannot be included for the purpose of computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act. The assessee relied on the decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench, in the case of Malana Power Company and Others, ITA No.2281/Del/2013, order dated

Mukand Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee ITA no 5879/M/2019 is dismissed and ITA

ITA 1626/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel. ARFor Respondent: Mr. S.N. Kabra.DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

making an addition amounting to Rs 4,06,19,842 in respect of expected loss on assets retired from active use while computing the book profit as per section 115JB of the Act. (b) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in not appreciating the fact that the expected loss ... 1626/Mum/2012 & 5879/M/2019- Mukund Limited. return of income on 26.03.2008 with a total income of Rs.Nil under normal provisions of Income Tax Act and the Book profits under provisions of section 115JB of the Act of Rs.1,20,56,19,876/-.The return of income was processed under section

Jsw Steel Limited, Mumbai vs. Addlcit, Bangalore

858/M/2011

ITA 858/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Amarjit Singh () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Jsw Steel Limited, The Addl. Cit, Range 11, Jindal Mansion, 5A, Vs. Bangalore. Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaacj 4323 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dc. Cc.46, M/S Jsw Steel Ltd., R.No. 659, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. Jindal Mansion, 5-A, Dr. G Bhavan, M.K. Road, Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaacj 4323 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Jsw Steel Ltd., Dcit, Central Circle 46, Jsw Centre, Bandra Kurla Vs. 6Th Flr., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Complex, Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacj 4323 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Danesh Bafna &For Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)

disallowances. In the said assessment order income under the regular provisions of the Act is assessed at ₹12,79,73,73,047/-and ‘book profit’ under section 115 JB of the Act has been assessed at ₹19,65,61,21,057/-. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed part ... books of accounts maintained as per the Company Act and subject to inclusion/exclusion of income listed in section 115 JB of the Act, for book profit is required to be computed in terms of section 115JB of the Act. JSW Steel Ltd. 7 ITA No.s 858/M/2011 & Ors. 6. We have

M/S. Corporation Bank, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Mangaluru

ITA 1109/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy S & Ita No.1680/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2015-16 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan, C.A &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

Applicability of provisions of section 115JB (Ground 8) 18. The assessee in the return of income for the relevant assessment year did not compute book profit u/s.115JB as the assessee was of the opinion that the assessee being a public sector bank, the requirement to compute book profit ... reason to interfere with the decision of CIT(A). This ground of the revenue is dismissed for statistical purposes. Adjustment to Book Profits (Ground No 20 to 22) 24. The next ground of the revenue is with regard to specific addition made to book profit as per sec. 115JB

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Bengaluru vs. M/S. Vijaya Bank, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1834/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ananthan, C.A &For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 234DSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)(v)Section 37(1)(vii)

However, since the tax payable on the total income computed as above by Assessing Officer was more than 18.5% of the book profits u/s 115JB, Assessing Officer assessed the tax payable as Rs. 169,44,47,405/-. 5. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before ... Applicability of provisions of section 115JB (Ground 6) 32. The assessee in the return of income for the relevant assessment year did not compute book profit u/s.115JB as the assessee was of the ITA Nos.1834/Bang/2018 & 1839/Bang/2018 Page 26 of 41 opinion that the assessee being a public sector bank

Reliance Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2876/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 28

section 115JB(2) i.e. expenditure relating to exempt income, when no such disallowance ought to have been made while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, relying on Tribunal decision in appellant's own case for AY 2009-10 vide corrigendum order dated 02.04.2008. 21. So far as this ... upon the Explanation 1(f) to Section 115JB(1) of the Act, the disallowance under section 14A is also to be added to the book profits. In appeal, learned CIT(A) upheld the adjustment in principle but restricted the quantum to the disallowance as computed by the assessee under section

DCIT (Ltu)-2, Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 2344/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

section 115JB(2) i.e. expenditure relating to exempt income, when no such disallowance ought to have been made while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, relying on Tribunal decision in appellant's own case for AY 2009-10 vide corrigendum order dated 02.04.2008. 21. So far as this ... upon the Explanation 1(f) to Section 115JB(1) of the Act, the disallowance under section 14A is also to be added to the book profits. In appeal, learned CIT(A) upheld the adjustment in principle but restricted the quantum to the disallowance as computed by the assessee under section

Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Mumbai

In the result, the ITA No

ITA 1645/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 28

section 115JB(2) i.e. expenditure relating to exempt income, when no such disallowance ought to have been made while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, relying on Tribunal decision in appellant's own case for AY 2009-10 vide corrigendum order dated 02.04.2008. 21. So far as this ... upon the Explanation 1(f) to Section 115JB(1) of the Act, the disallowance under section 14A is also to be added to the book profits. In appeal, learned CIT(A) upheld the adjustment in principle but restricted the quantum to the disallowance as computed by the assessee under section

Dy CIT 10 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Olivia Impex Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 8046/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Mar 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Sri.R A Dhyani. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sri.Gunjan Kakkad.AR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

order and finally observed that the mark to market losses cannot be allowed and should be added in the computation of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. (iv) The A.O found that the assessee has claimed the interest expenditure to the extent of Rs.1,14,29,361/- under ... commission paid to resident Agents. Finally the A.O. has assessed the total income of Rs.42,293,390/- and similarly worked out to computation of book profits under 115JB of the Act with addition of unrealized foreign exchange loss and passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated

M/S. Asia Power Projects Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result appeals filed by assessee as well as revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 59/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Asia Power Projects Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 6, Lakeside Residency, 4 Income Tax, Annaswamy Mudaliar Road, Circle – 11 (1), Bangalore – 560 042. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aadca0485B Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Revenue) : Shri Chavali Narayan, Ca & Assessee By Shri Keerthi Narayan, Ca : Shri Srinath Sadanala, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Are Filed By Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Order Dated 09.09.2016 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-1, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2011-12 On Following Grounds Of Appeal. “The Grounds Of Appeal Listed Below Are Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. That The Order Of The Learned Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (`A0') Dated 31 January 2014 & The Order

Section 115JSection 195Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)

appreciating the fact that the in the earlier AYs when the provision for future losses was created, the same was added back while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act and since during the subject AY there was reversal of the provision (amount credited to profit and loss ... account) to the extent of Rs 2.25,89.037 the same needs to be deducted from the book profits. Issue 4 — Set off of brought forward losses 7. The learned CIT(A) without appreciating the fact that during the subject AY taxes under the normal provisions of the Act was higher

Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Asia Power Projects Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result appeals filed by assessee as well as revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 211/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011-12 M/S. Asia Power Projects Pvt. The Deputy Ltd., Commissioner Of No. 6, Lakeside Residency, 4 Income Tax, Annaswamy Mudaliar Road, Circle – 11 (1), Bangalore – 560 042. Vs. Bangalore. Pan: Aadca0485B Appellant Respondent & Assessment Year : 2011-12 (By Revenue) : Shri Chavali Narayan, Ca & Assessee By Shri Keerthi Narayan, Ca : Shri Srinath Sadanala, Addl. Revenue By Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 15-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Cross Appeals Are Filed By Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Order Dated 09.09.2016 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-1, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2011-12 On Following Grounds Of Appeal. “The Grounds Of Appeal Listed Below Are Without Prejudice To Each Other. 1. That The Order Of The Learned Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax (`A0') Dated 31 January 2014 & The Order

Section 115JSection 195Section 263Section 37Section 37(1)

appreciating the fact that the in the earlier AYs when the provision for future losses was created, the same was added back while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act and since during the subject AY there was reversal of the provision (amount credited to profit and loss ... account) to the extent of Rs 2.25,89.037 the same needs to be deducted from the book profits. Issue 4 — Set off of brought forward losses 7. The learned CIT(A) without appreciating the fact that during the subject AY taxes under the normal provisions of the Act was higher

DCIT 1(1), Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1185/MUM/2009[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2022AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1185/Mum/2009 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Dcit-1(1) बिधम/ M/S. Acc Ltd. Room No.579, Aayakar Cement House, 121, M. K. Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaact1507C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Ms.Shailja Rai (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Yogesh Thar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.11.2008 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -I Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2003- 04. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - " L. “Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit (A) Is Right In Directing To Delete The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Unutilized Modvat Credit & Further In Directing To Allow The Relief Of Rs. 12,09,86,528/- Instead Of Rs. 3,21,85,825/-.” A.Y.2003-04 2. “Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit (A) Is Right In Deleting The Addition In Respect Of Corporation Tax Paid At Saudi Arabia Of Rs. 2,05,75,346/-.”

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Ms.Shailja Rai (DR)
Section 115JSection 154Section 251Section 80H

case and in law, the CIT (A) is right in directing the Assessing Officer to allow reduction u/s. 80HHC on the basis of book profit for determining tax payable u/s.115JB of the Act.” 6. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend or withdraw the aforesaid ground of appeal”, Grounds ... under: - “6. Under these issues the assessee has challenged the confirmation of the addition of Corporate Tax paid at Saudi Arabia in computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act to the tune of Rs.2,05,75,346/-. The Ld. Representative of the assessee has argued that the corporate

M/S. Karnataka Power Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 11(5), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 26/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 115JSection 80I

case of companies whose tax payable on the total income works out to be below a certain minimum threshold percentage of its book profit. From perusal of the Circular dated 18.02.1998 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it is evident that the object for introduction of minimum alternative ... levy a minimum tax on companies which are having book profits and paying dividends but are not paying any taxes. The relevant extract of Section 115JB of the Act reads as under: 2. Every assessee, being a company, shall, for the purposes of this section, prepare its profit and loss

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Karnataka Power Corporation Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue and the assessee are dismissed

ITA 10/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, D.R
Section 115JSection 80I

case of companies whose tax payable on the total income works out to be below a certain minimum threshold percentage of its book profit. From perusal of the Circular dated 18.02.1998 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, it is evident that the object for introduction of minimum alternative ... levy a minimum tax on companies which are having book profits and paying dividends but are not paying any taxes. The relevant extract of Section 115JB of the Act reads as under: 2. Every assessee, being a company, shall, for the purposes of this section, prepare its profit and loss