Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a domestic company that validly exercised the option under section 115BAA by filing Form No. 10-IC could still be subjected to tax under section 115JB for the relevant assessment year, and whether the consequent demand was liable to be rectified.
Analysis: Section 115JB(5A) provides that the provisions of section 115JB do not apply to a person whose income is taxable under section 115BAA and who has exercised the prescribed option. The filing of Form No. 10-IC was not in dispute, and the statutory circular clarified that companies opting for section 115BAA are not liable to pay Minimum Alternate Tax under section 115JB and that the option continues for subsequent assessment years. On this basis, the levy of tax under section 115JB, despite the valid option already on record, was contrary to the governing provisions and constituted an apparent mistake rectifiable under section 154.
Conclusion: The assessee could not have been subjected to tax under section 115JB once the option under section 115BAA had been validly exercised; the demand based on section 115JB was liable to be deleted and the matter was decided in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: A validly exercised option under section 115BAA excludes the applicability of section 115JB by statutory command, and any tax demand raised contrary to that position is rectifiable as a mistake apparent from the record.