TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CIT's revision under Section 263 regarding MAT computation under Section 115JB was improper and set aside</h1> <h3>Polygel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus v. PCIT – Mumbai – 2, Mumbai</h3> Polygel Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus v. PCIT – Mumbai – 2, Mumbai - TMI Issues Involved:The appeal against the order of the Learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai -2 under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2018-19.Details of the Judgment:1. Assessment Proceedings:The assessee, engaged in manufacturing, filed a return declaring total income of Nil for A.Y. 2018-19. The assessment under sections 143(3), 143(3A), and 143(3B) of the Act was completed, making certain additions. Subsequently, the Principal Commissioner observed errors in the assessment order and issued a notice under section 263, deeming it prejudicial to revenue's interest.2. Contentions of the Assessee:The assessee contended that the computation under section 115JB was correct and disputed the figure of book profits mentioned in the notice. The Principal Commissioner clarified that the figure in question pertained to the Consolidated Financial Statements, not the Standalone Financial Statements, leading to a contradiction in the assessee's submissions.3. Principal Commissioner's Decision:The Principal Commissioner found the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interest as the Assessing Officer failed to examine the issue properly. He directed a de novo assessment, prompting the assessee to appeal, challenging the PCIT's decision.4. Appellate Tribunal's Analysis:The Tribunal noted discrepancies between the standalone and consolidated profits declared by the assessee. It emphasized that profits of subsidiaries and associates cannot be taxed twice, setting aside the PCIT's order and allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.5. Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the Principal Commissioner's directive to reassess the profits of subsidiaries and associates in the hands of the assessee was not justified. The order under section 263 was set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee were upheld, resulting in the appeal being allowed.6. Final Decision:The appeal was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal, overturning the Principal Commissioner's order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
