Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 61 - HC - Income TaxMAT - Scope of section 115J - Deletion of interest from the purview of section 115J - Held that:-Assessee contended that once the amount has suffered tax and its inclusion in the book profit was only for the purpose of reflecting the financial state of affairs, there was no basis to bring it under the purview of the tax once again under Section 115J - Notwithstanding the freedom given to an assessee to state its book profit in its annual report submitted as part of its obligation under the Companies Act, he is kept under obligation to be truthful - The book profit is liable to be increased or decreased, depending upon the factors that are mentioned in the explanation - one central theme is that the profit and loss shall be with reference to the relevant previous year - for their own reasons, the assessee did not want to reflect the income on corporate deposits in any form whatever. Though the facility to bring those very amounts u/s 115J of the Act was available for two AY 1988-89 and 1989-90, that was not resorted to, obviously because an AO is precluded from making any additions, deletions, or alterations to the profit and loss account, referable to Section 115J of the Act - it is only the authorities under the Companies Act that are conferred with the power to scrutinise such accounts - the mere inclusion of those amounts in the profit and loss account referable to u/s 115J of the Act for the AY 1994-95 did not make much of difference from the point of view of income tax - Bringing those amounts to tax once again, may be, u/s 115J of the Act could have resulted in anomaly if not absurdity - no provision can be understood or interpreted in such a way as to lead an absurd or anomalous situation - This principle gets attracted with added vigour, when a situation is brought about, by operation of two different enactments – the order of the Tribunal is upheld – Decided against revenue.
|