Dismissed

Commissioner of Income Tax-Ii, v. M/s. Avon Organics Limited

Telangana HC15 Nov 2012ITTA/143/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Revenue appeal against the Tribunal's order regarding Minimum Alternate Tax deductions. Counsel conceded that the raised questions were already answered against the Revenue by Supreme Court decisions, leading to dismissal at the admission stage.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed at the stage of admission with no costs.

Commissioner of Income Tax-Ii, Vs M/s. Avon Organics Limited — Income Tax | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

¶2

I.T.T.A.No.143 of 2012

¶3

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)

¶4

Heard Sri S.R.Ashok, learned senior counsel for the appellant-Revenue.

¶5

This appeal is preferred under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench dated 07.11.2008 in I.T.A.No.416/Hyd/2007. The three substantial questions of law presented for consideration in this appeal by the Revenue read thus: -

¶6

“(a) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessed is entitled to benefit of deduction under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act in the context of computation of Minimum Alternate Tax under Section 115 JA/115 JB of the Income Tax Act without reference to Sections 28 to 43 of the Income Tax Act?

¶7

(b) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in not holding that parameters stipulated for calculating relief under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act in a regular assessment, has no application in the context of reckoning the said relief while calculating Minimum Alternate Tax under Section 115JA and 115 JB of the Income Tax Act?

¶8

(c) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that netting principle shall be applied for the purpose of deduction under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act?”

¶9

It is fairly conceded by the learned senior counsel that questions (a) and (b) are covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Supreme Court reported

¶10

in Ajanta Pharma Ltd V. CIT^[1] ; and that question (c) is also covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Supreme Court reported in ACG Associated Capsules Pvt Ltd V. CIT^[2] .

¶11

In view of the submission, the appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs.

¶12

______________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM

¶13

__________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO 15^th November 2012 DR [1] (2010) 327 ITR 305 [2] (2012) 343 ITR 89

Commissioner of Income Tax-Ii, v. M/s. Avon Organics Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Commissioner of Income Tax-Ii, v. M/s. Avon Organics Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Vs M/s.Spectra Comprints (P) Limited

The State of A.P. State Reprsentative Vs M/s Spectra Compriate (P) Ltd.

The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs M/s.Daxin Forms

The Coomissioner of Income Tax-v Vs M/s.Mahanagar Estates

Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs Agricultural Market Committee

Texmaco Ltd. Vs State of A.P. Its Apelleten Trrbunal Hy