TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 781
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "the Ld. CIT(A)"]. 1.1 In this case, the Ld. AO noticed that certain additions to the income u/s 14A of the Act were not factored into the computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. The Ld. AO, thereafter, proceeded ahead to rectify the alleged error u/s 154 of the Act and thereby included the addition u/s 14A of the Act in the computation of income for the purposes of section 115JB of the Act. 1.2 The assessee caried this matter in appeal, where he could not succeed on the basis of the following finding: "7.1.2 The financial statement pertains to the instant year in the case of assessee reflects that the assessee had an exempt income of Rs. 78,70,907/- and Rs. 90,91,056/- respectively both for the A.Y.2017-18 (the ye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re directly related to the Dividend earning also hence, the denial as well as failure to quantify the figure by the assessee itself who had expended the money is nothing but only a wilful attempt to avoid depositing the legitimate tax on actual total income Even the assessee has not come forward with the cogent evidence to justify its claim on merit during the appeal proceedings also. Rather, the assessee has preferred to refer the judgments of various Hon'ble ITATs and Hon'ble Karnataka High Court which was adjudicated on similar issue of Book Profit but favoured the assessee only on different footings like e.g. the AO has already concluded in the original assessment without extending any addition u/s 14A or where sufficient fund w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (04.11.2020). It was the further argument that the issue of whether or not enhancements to income u/s 14A of the Act should be considered for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, was a debatable issue at best and thus it could not be considered u/s 154 of the Act, in any case. 2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below. 3. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the documents before us. We have also perused the case laws cited by the Ld. AR. Right at the outset, it deserves to be mentioned that notwithstanding the merit of the case we are easily reminded about the case of Volkart Brothers reported in 82 ITR 50 (SC), which is the locus classicus on the subject of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ITR 712 (Kar) has specifically directed that the amount disallowed under Section 14A could not be added to net profit while computing book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. Similarly, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT (Central)-1, Vs. Moon Star Securities Trade and Finance Co. (P) Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 158 as also directed that disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act could not be considered while computing MAT under Section 115JB of the Act. These authorities are merely cited as illustrations since there are other judicial pronouncements also on the subject, including an unreported judgement of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court: CIT vs Jayshree Tea Limited (ITAT 47 of 2014 and GA 1501 of 2014, or....