MAT credit should be given after computing cess and SHEC

Rule 12(1)(a) of Income-tax Rules and Form for filing return of income couldn't go beyond the provisions of the Act - Income-tax includes surcharge which is a receipt in the nature of additional income-tax - Tax has to be computed on the total income as assessed under normal provisions of the Income-tax Act as increased by applicable surcharge and education cess - MAT credit to be granted thereafter

Facts:

(a) The Assessing officer made certain additions during assessment of the assessee.

(b) The assessee contended that the MAT credit should be allowed before calculation of surcharge and education-cess, as per the methodology provided in the form for filing of return of income.

(c) The CIT(A) rejected such contention and held against the assessee. The aggrieved-assessee filed the instant appeal.

• The Tribunal held as under:

(1) In an issue before the Madras High Court in Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. [2009] 180 Taxman 335 as to whether the form for filing return of income, which lays down the manner of computing the total tax, prevails over the provisions of the Act, the Court held that rule 12(1)(a) of Income-tax Rules and Form for filing of return couldn't go beyond the provisions of the Act;

(2) The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. K Srinivasan [1972] 83 ITR 346 held as under:
(a) The meaning of 'surcharge' is to charge in addition or to subject to an additional or extra charge. The additional charges form a part of the income-tax and Super-tax. The word 'surcharge' has been used in article 271 for the purposes of distributing the proceeds between the Union and the States.
(b) The proceeds of the surcharge are exclusively assigned to the Union. Even in the Finance Act it is expressly stated that the surcharge is meant for the purpose of Union;

(3) The income-tax includes surcharge which is a receipt in the nature of additional income-tax. The assessee's argument that the term 'tax' has been defined under section 2(43) and it includes only income-tax and not surcharge, goes against the proposition laid down by the Supreme Court. The only requirement is that the levy should have been under the Income-tax Act itself as there is no reference to any Central Act in the proviso or in section 158BA(2). [Merit Enterprises v. DCIT (Hyd.)(SB).

(4) Thus, the impugned tax is to be computed on the total income as assessed under normal provisions of the Income-tax Act as increased by applicable surcharge and education cess, thereafter credit of MAT is to be granted.
Share on Google Plus

About Nitin Aggarwal

    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment