AMT provisions u/s 115JC do not apply to pre-approved housing projects: ITAT

Case Details: ACIT v. Vijay Tukaram Raundal - [2023] 147 taxmann.com 53 (Pune-Trib.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • R.S. Syal, Vice President &  S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member
  • Sardar Singh Meena for the Appellant.
  • Mihir Naniwadekar for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

Assessee-individual was a builder and developer. For the relevant assessment year, assessee computed income under normal provisions of the Act [total income after claiming deduction under section 80-IB(10)] and adjusted total income as per section 115JC. Assessee filed return of income by declaring income as per section 115JC.

The applicability of section 115JC was not contested before the CIT(A). However, the assessee raised the issue for the first time before the Tribunal by disputing its incorrect application due to the housing project’s earlier commencement in a prior year.

ITAT Held

The Tribunal held that the section 115JC starts with a non obstante clause and provides that where the regular income tax ‘payable for a previous year’ is less than the alternate minimum tax payable for ‘for such previous year, the adjusted total income shall be deemed to be the total income of that person ‘for such previous year’ and he shall be liable to pay income-tax on such total income at the rate of 18.5 percent.

This provision unambiguously pertains to the total income “of the previous year” which must be replaced in accordance with this provision’s requirement if the income for that previous year under the regular provisions is lower than what is specified in this section.

The assessee contended that though this section applies to the year under consideration, it should not be applied because the housing project was approved in an earlier year when this section was not in vogue.

Tribunal said it found no logic in the interpretation of this provision as made by the assessee. Neither section 115JC excludes its application in respect of housing projects approved before its insertion nor does section 80-IB(10) contain any such stipulation.

As section 115JC applies to a previous year, it cannot be construed to have applicability in part qua the other incomes and inapplicability in respect of income from the housing projects approved under section 80-IB(1) before it came into force.

Therefore, there was no merit in the ground raised by the assessee.

List of Cases Reviewed

• • Jamunabai Parmananddas Shah v. Bajirao Seetaram Kalbhor [1995] (1) Mh.L.J. 564 (para 18)
  • Shree Krishna Sai Development Corpn. v. ITO [2011] 9 taxmann.com 153/130 ITD 31/139 TTJ 123 (Mum.) (para 19) distinguished.

List of Cases Referred to

• • Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Dilip Kumar and Co. [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/69 GST 239/361 ELT 577 (SC) [2018] 9 SCC 1 (para 16)
  • Sun Export Corpn. v. Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696/1997 (93) ELT 641 (SC)/[1997] 6 SCC 564 (para 16)
  • Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand 2006 taxmann.com 1843/2005 (140) ELT 284 (SC)/[2005] 4 SCC 272 (para 16)
  • Jamunabai Parmananddas Shah v. Bajirao Seetaram Kalbhor [1995] (1) Mh.L.J. 564 (para 18)
  • Shree Krishna Sai Development Corpn. v. ITO [2011] 9 taxmann.com 153/130 ITD 31/139 TTJ 123 (Mum.) (para 19)
  • Vikram Developers & Promoters v. Dy. CIT [IT Appeal Nos. 2795 & 2796 (Pun.) of 2016, dated 14-11-2019] (para 26).