Calcutta High Court
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Tata Metaliks Limited on 6 April, 2022
Author: T.S. Sivagnanam
Bench: T.S. Sivagnanam, Hiranmay Bhattacharyya
OD-5 & 6
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)
ORIGINAL SIDE
IA No: GA/1/2021
ITAT/69/2021
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, KOLKATA
VERSUS
M/S. TATA METALIKS LIMITED
IA No: GA/2/2021
ITAT/69/2021
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, KOLKATA
VERSUS
M/S. TATA METALIKS LIMITED
BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Date : 6th April, 2022
Appearance :-
Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Adv.
... For Appellant
Mr. Dipro Sen, Adv.
Ms. Swapna Das, Adv.
...For Respondent.
The Court : We have heard Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant/revenue and Mr. Dipro Sen, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 2
There is a delay of 472 days in filing the appeal. One of the substantial questions of law raised in this appeal has been entertained in the assessee's own case in ITAT No.9 of 2021 and such question was admitted on 18th January, 2022. Therefore, we exercise discretion and condone the delay in filing the appeal. The application for condonation of delay being IA No.GA/1/2021 is allowed.
Re: ITAT/69/2021 The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:
i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned ITAT is justified in deleting the disallowance of Industrial Promotion Assistance (IPA) subsidy of Rs.97,24,250/- and Deferred Sales Tax liability of Rs.3,80,49,198/- ignoring the fact that both these receipts are recurring in nature and they are revenue receipts and not capital receipts?
ii) Whether on the facts and in law the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance in computing the book profit under section 115JB relating to Industrial Promotion Assistance of Rs.97,24,250/- and Deferred Sales Tax liability of Rs.3,80,49,198/- as these receipts are not covered by any of the Clause (I) to (VII) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB of the Act and thus cannot 3 be reduced from book profit under section 115JB of the Act?
iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs.3,59,44,876/- under Section 14A read with Rule 8D?
iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs.3,59,44,876/- under Section 14A read with Rule 8D for the calculation of Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Act?
v) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the substitution of the explanation in Clause(b) after the Proviso in Section 14A(1) would in any manner materially affect the facts as pleaded by the assessee before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), especially when the facts were not adjudicated by the CIT(A)?
The appellant shall file requisite number of informal paper book prepared out of Court within eight weeks from date by serving advance copy on the respondent.
Since the respondent is represented by their learned Counsel, service of notice of this appeal on them is waived.
Settlement of index and all other formalities are dispensed with. 4 List the present appeal along with ITAT No.9 of 2021 after ten weeks.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) SN/Spal AR(CR)