Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312621 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
29-04-2025
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
B
Assessment Year
2023-2024
Judgement Text
" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” ा यपीठ चे\u0012ई म\u0015। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHENNAI मा ननीय \u0018ी एबी टी. वक , ा ियक सद एवं मा ननीय \u0018ी मनोज क ुमा र अ$वा ल ,लेखा सद क े सम&। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं ./ ITA No.3225/Chny/2024 (िनधा 'रण वष' / Assessment Year: 2023-24) M/s Theia Healthcare Plot no.10, SF-1 2nd Floor, Tamabaram Sanatorium – 600047 बनाम/ Vs. Income Tax Officer NCW 10(3), Nungambakkam Chennai - 600034 \u0002थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAGFT-2488-K (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri V.V.Rajkumar (CA) – Ld. AR थ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 28-04-2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24 arises out of an order passed by Ld. Addl. / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Prayagraj [CIT(A)] on 18-11-2024 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) on 17-01-2024. The assessee being resident firm is aggrieved by computation of Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 2. The assessee determined its taxable income at Rs.3.90 Lacs and computed normal tax @30%. The same was arrived at after claiming 2 deduction u/s 80JJAA for Rs.11.40 Lacs. The CPC accepted the returned income but raised a demand of Rs.1.95 Lacs by applying AMT. The AMT was to be applied @18.5% on adjusted book profits which worked out to be Rs.15.31 Lacs after adding back deduction as claimed by the assessee u/s 80JJAA for Rs.11.40 Lacs. The tax on adjusted book profit was worked out by CPC @18.5% which resulted into impugned demand against the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A), finding no error in the computation, dismissed the appeal against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has primarily contended that the aforesaid deduction as claimed by the assessee u/s 80JJA should not have been added back and this deduction has wrongly been grouped under the head ‘deduction in respect of certain income’. In other words, the assessee challenges the vires of statutory provisions. The Ld. Sr. DR has opposed any interference in the impugned order and stated that the computations have been made in accordance with law. 3. We find the provisions of Sec.115JC as contained in Chapter-XIIBA are special provisions applicable to certain persons (including partnership firms) other than a company. These provisions provide that where the regular income-tax payable for a previous year by a person, other than a company, is less than the alternate minimum tax payable for such previous year, the adjusted total income shall be deemed to be the total income of that person for such previous year and he shall be liable to pay income-tax on such total income at the rate of eighteen and one- half per cent. The term ‘Adjusted total income’ referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the total income before giving effect to this Chapter as increased, inter-alia, by deductions claimed, if any, under any section (other than section 80P) included in Chapter VI-A under the 3 heading \"C.—Deductions in respect of certain incomes”. This heading indeed include deduction u/s 80JJAA. Quite clearly, the computations as made by CPC is well in line with aforesaid statutory provisions and no fault could be found in the same. The assessee has challenged the vires of the statutory provisions which is beyond the jurisdiction of Tribunal, it being a quasi-judicial authority and a statutory creation. Therefore, the plea of Ld. AR could not be accepted. However, credit of AMT would be available to the assessee in subsequent years in accordance with law as rightly observed by Ld. CIT(A). 4. The appeal stands dismissed. Order pronounced on 29th April, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (ABY T. VARKEY) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) ा ियक सद /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :29-04-2025 DS आदेश की Gितिलिप अ$ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT Madurai/Chennai. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF "
AI Insights
The case involves M/s Theia Healthcare, a resident firm, appealing against an order related to the computation of Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) for the Assessment Year 2023-24. The appeal arose from an intimation by the Centralized Processing Center (CPC) which adjusted the assessee's book profits by adding back a deduction claimed under section 80JJAA, leading to a demand for additional tax. The CIT(A) upheld the CPC's decision, which was contested by the assessee before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the lower authorities' computations and rejecting the assessee's challenge to the statutory provisions governing AMT.
