Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Caplin Point Laboratories Ltd., ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 8 January, 2014
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'D' BENCH, CHENNAI.
Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member &
Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member
ITA No.667/Mds/2013
Assessment Year: 2009-10
The Assistant Commissioner M/s. Caplin Point Laboratories Ltd.,
of Income Tax, Vs. No.3, 'Narbavi', Lakshmanan Street,
Company Circle I(3), T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017.
Chennai 600 034. [PAN : AABCC2667F]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Dasgupta, JCIT
Respondent by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Date of Hearing : 08.01.2014
Date of pronouncement : 31.01.2014
ORDER
PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) IX, Chennai dated 27.12.2012 relevant to the assessment year 2009-10.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return admitting total income at `.23,05,710/-. Under book profit method, the taxable income was arrived at `.1,92,04,515/- under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act by determining taxable income of the assessee at `.1,30,47,629/- 2 I.T.A. No.667
No.667/M/ 667/M/13 /M/13 under conventional scheme and tax payable including interest of `.48,34,826/- by making various disallowances.
3. On appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals) deleted the disallowance of `.17,127/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A of the Act.
4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
5. Ground No. 2 relates to addition under section 14A of the Act. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the amount being very small, he is not serious in raising objection against this ground. Therefore, keeping in view of the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, this ground of appeal of the Revenue is allowed.
6. The next ground of appeal relating to MAT credit of amalgamated company. The issue involved in this appeal is whether the amalgamated company is entitled to allow the credit of entitled MAT credit or not. According to the Assessing Officer, the provisions of section 115JA and section 115JB of the Act are self contained sections and there is no provision under this section to allow credit of an amalgamating entity in the hands of the amalgamated entity. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer denied the claim of the assessee.
3 I.T.A. No.667
No.667/M/ 667/M/13 /M/13
7. On appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals), by following the ITAT order in the case of M/s. Ranganathan Industries Private Limited v. Addl. CIT in I.T.A. No.2434/Mds/2004, directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the assessee.
8. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
9. The ld. DR supported the order of the Assessing Officer.
10. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on this issue.
11. We have heard both sides, perused the materials on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. The case of the assessee is that the amalgamation between the amalgamating company [Malind Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.] and the amalgamated company i.e. the assessee was approved by the Hon'ble Madras High Court vide order dated 25.09.2008 and on amalgamation, all the assets and liabilities are vested with the amalgamated company and the amalgamated company i.e. the assessee only continues the business of the amalgamating company and claimed MAT credit. However, the Assessing Officer denied the claim of the assessee on the ground that the provisions of section 115JA and section 115JB of the Act are self contained sections and there is no provision under this section to allow credit of an amalgamating entity in the hands of the amalgamated entity. On 4 I.T.A. No.667 No.667/M/ 667/M/13 /M/13 appeal, the ld. CIT(Appeals) after considering the submissions of the assessee and by following the decision of the ITAT in the case of M/s. Ranganathan Industries Private Limited v. Addl. CIT in I.T.A. No.2434/Mds/ 2004 vide order dated 30.11.2007, in which it has been held has under:
"Upon a careful consideration of the issue we find that, after amalgamation the assessee company is entitled to all the assets, claims, etc. of the erstwhile company, which is also supported by Hon'ble High Court order in this regard. Further, when the assessee company is now being assessed in place of erstwhile company and the TDS credit pertaining to the erstwhile company is being given credit to the assessee company, there is no reason why a different treatment should be given to the MAT credit available pertaining to the erstwhile company. We do not agree with the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that there is need for specific mention in this regard in Section 115JAA as the Carry forward of MAT credit of erstwhile company by amalgamated company is in-built in the scheme of amalgamation as well as the scheme of MAT credit. Hence, we set aside the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in this regard and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. "
12. The ld. CIT(Appeals), by following the above decision of the Tribunal, directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the assessee. Moreover, the ld. DR could not controvert the above findings of the Tribunal or filed any higher Court's decision to take a different view. In view of the above, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) on this issue and dismiss the grounds raised by the Revenue.
5 I.T.A. No.667
No.667/M/ 667/M/13 /M/13
13. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed.
Order pronounced on Friday, the 31st of January, 2014 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (V. DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, the 31.01.2014 Vm/- To: The assessee/A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.