2016 (12) TMI 1637

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeal of Rs. 10 lakhs was not fulfilled in this case. 3. In the M.A., the Assessing Officer contends that tax paid in this appeal is Rs. 10,19,700/-, which is more than the mandatory limit of Rs. 10 lakhs. 4. Ld. Counsel on the other hand placed on record the working of the tax effect as under: Statement showing calculation of disputed taxes and education cess Particulars Amount (Rs.) Amount of addition involved in departmental appeal 30,00,000 Tax thereon @ 30% 9,00,000 Add: Surcharge @ 10% 90,000 Total taxes including surcharge 9,90,000 Add: Education Cess 29,700 Total taxes including surcharge 10,19,700 4.1 It was submitted that for the purpose of working out tax effect, surcharge of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT Vs. M/s Dome Bell Electronics, in ITA No. 2480/Mum/2012, order dated 22/07/2016, for similar interpretation. 5. Ld. DR, however, relied on the order of Assessing Officer to submit that tax include surcharge and cess. 6. We have considered the issue. As far as the definition of tax is concerned, the tax does not include surcharge and cess as per the above referred cases. The coordinate bench in the case of DCIT Vs. Dome Bell Electronics (supra) has considered this issue vide para 3.2 of its order, which is as under: "3.2. We have gone through the facts of this case and also gone through the aforesaid circular as well as sub-section (43) of section 2 of the Act which defines word 'tax'. It is noted that 3 Dome Bell E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1st day of April, 2006, and any subsequent assessment year includes the fringe benefit tax payable under Section 115WA]" It is clear that tax, as per the above definition, would include supertax and also fringe benefit tax but not surcharge. Admittedly, here, the tax was only Rs. 2,90,250/- which is below the limit of Rs. 3 lakhs prescribed in the Circular for filing appeals before this Tribunal. Resultantly, we do not find any mistake in the order of this Tribunal much less any mistake apparent on record. We have also gone through sub-section (43) of section 2 which defines 'tax'. The perusal of the definition shows that whatever was intended to be included in tax has been mentioned therein. When the legislature h....