https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463664 The dominant issue was whether "maximum marginal rate" under s. 2(29C) r.w.s. 164/167B necessarily includes surcharge applicable to the highest slab under the relevant Finance Act, even where the assessee's total income is below the surcharge threshold. The Tribunal held that "surcharge, if any" in s. 2(29C) refers to surcharge specified for the highest slab in the Finance Act for the relevant AY, and is not linked to the assessee's own income slab; if the Finance Act prescribes surcharge for the highest slab, it forms part of MMR, otherwise it does not. Applying binding ITAT precedent, it upheld CPC's computation including highest-slab surcharge and dismissed the appeal. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463664 The dominant issue was whether "maximum marginal rate" under s. 2(29C) r.w.s. 164/167B necessarily includes surcharge applicable to the highest slab under the relevant Finance Act, even where the assessee's total income is below the surcharge threshold. The Tribunal held that "surcharge, if any" in s. 2(29C) refers to surcharge specified for the highest slab in the Finance Act for the relevant AY, and is not linked to the assessee's own income slab; if the Finance Act prescribes surcharge for the highest slab, it forms part of MMR, otherwise it does not. Applying binding ITAT precedent, it upheld CPC's computation including highest-slab surcharge and dismissed the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 18 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463664