ACIT LTU-2, CHENNAI V. Saint Gobain Galss India Ltd., Kanchipuram

ITA 61/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2291 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Section: 115JB

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, C BENCH : CHENNAI . , ! ' # ' $ . %& , ( * + [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ] ./I.T.A. NO.61/CHNY/2018. / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT-2, CHENNAI 600 034. VS. M/S. SAINT GOBAIN GLASS INDIA LTD, PLOT NO.A-1, SIPCOT INDUSTRIAL PARK, SRIPERUMBUDUR, KANCHIPURAM DIST. 602 106. [PAN AABCS 4338M] ( ,- / APPELLANT) ( ./,- /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDL. CIT. /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADV /DATE OF HEARING : 04-09-2018 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05-09-2018 0 / O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, WHICH IS DIR ECTED AGAINST AN ORDER DATED 31.10.2017 OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS)-5, CHENNAI, IT IS AGGRIEVED THAT LD. COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWED MAT CREDIT U/S.115JAA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, ITA NO.61 /2018 :- 2 -: 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), AS ADJUSTMENT FROM THE TAX ON TOTAL INCOME BEFORE APPLYING SURCHARGE AND EDUCATIONAL CESS. 2. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH, IT WAS ADMITTED BY THE L D. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE DIFFERENCE ON ACCOUNT OF EDUCATIONAL CESS IN THE MAT CREDIT WAS F1,04,72,41 5/- ONLY. TAX APPLICABLE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 UNDER MAT PROVISION IS 15% AND THIS WOULD BE LESS THAN F20,00,000/-. ACCORDING LY BY VIRTUE OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO.03/2018, DATED 11.07.2018, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE MAY NOT SURVIVE. 3. EVEN OTHERWISE THE QUESTION RAISED BY THE REVENUE D OES NOT MERIT ACCEPTANCE. THIS IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT TAX CREDIT TO BE ALLOWED U/S.115JAA OF THE ACT BY VIRTUE OF SUB SECTION (1) THEREOF IS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAX PAID FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR U/S.115JA( 1) OF THE ACT, AND THE AMOUNT OF TAX PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORD ANCE WITH OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. THE IMPORTANT WORD USED IS T AX PAID. AS PER THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE 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 E XTENT 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 TERM USED IS TAX AND NOT INCOME TAX. CONSIDERIN G THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE APEX COURT MENTIONED SUPRA, IN OUR OPINION, THE DECISIONS RELIED ON BY THE REVENUE WOULD NOT FURTHER ITS CASE . 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 5 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ' # ' $ . %& ) ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) ( / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER '# / CHENNAI $% / DATED: 5TH SEPTEMBER, 2018. KV %& '()( / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. *+, / CIT(A) 5. (-. / / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. * / CIT 6. .01 / GF