Dismissed

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Shree Cement Limited

Rajasthan HC22 Apr 2024ITA/294/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An Income Tax Appellate Court disposed of an appeal filed by the appellant Principal Commissioner against an ITAT order in a D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 294/2018. The substantial question regarding the quashing of reassessment proceedings became academic due to the respondent's deposit of tax and non-contest on merits following retrospective amendments.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of as infructuous with the respondent depositing tax and not contesting the issue on merits.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S Shree Cement Limited — Income Tax | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:18621-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 294/2018

¶4

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ajmer

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s Shree Cement Limited, Bangur Nagar, Post Box No.33, Beawar, Rajasthan 305901

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddarath Bapna For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anant Kasliwal, Sr.Adv. With Mr. Raghav Krishnatri

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

¶11

Order

¶12

22/04/2024 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J (ORAL):-

¶13

Aggrieved of order dated 24.04.2018 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur this appeal is filed under Section 260(A) of Income Tax Act, 1961(for short the “Act”).

¶14

Brief facts are that the respondent-Company for assessment year (for short “AY”) filed the returns and the assessment was framed under Section 143(3) of the Act. The proceedings were initiated under Section 148 on the basis that the appellant has wrongly debited the Education Cess in the profit and loss account . In other words, the appellant has claimed Education Cess as business expense. The addition of Rs. 6,30,40,519/- was made by Assessing Officer vide order dated 18.11.2016. The respondent failed in first appeal. The Tribunal quashed the initiation of reassessment proceedings and allowed

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[2024:RJ-JP:18621-DB]

¶17

[ITA-294/2018]

¶18

the appeal, the other ground raised with regard to the nature of Education Cess was not gone into.

¶19

On 28.02.2019, the appeal was admitted by formulating following substantial question of law:-

¶20

“Whether the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was justified in reversing the decision of CIT(A) and quashing the assessment proceeding initiated u/s. 147 of the Act, 1961 ignoring the provisions of Explanation 1 of Section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961?”

¶21

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent on specific instruction submits that in view of the retrospective amendment in Section 40 of the Act by Finance Act, 2022, the respondent is not contesting the issue of Education Cess being a business expense. The respondent has deposited the tax due thereupon and in case of any short deposit, the same shall be deposited.

¶22

In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent, the substantial question of law formulated has been rendered academic. With the deposit of tax and by non contesting of the issue on merits, the appeal has been rendered revenue neutral and is disposed of as infructuous.

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

(AVNEESH JHINGAN),J

Anu /Chandan/95

Whether Reportable: No

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Shree Cement Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Shree Cement Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Ashoka Picture Palace Alwa Vs Assistant Commissioner, Commer

M/S Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Gujarat State Road Transport C Vs the Commissioner, Transport De

M/S Hcl Infosystems Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner

Kuldeep Singh Tailor Son of Late Shri Nemi Chand Verma Vs the Director (E-Ii), Employees State Insurance Corporation

Commissioner of Customs and Excise Vs Dee Chem Plastics Pvt. Ltd.