• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

Tribunal holds section 79 not applicable where the shareholder continues to hold 100%, although partly indirectly, post-amalgamation of the company having brought forward losses

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2024

Membagikan "Tribunal holds section 79 not applicable where the shareholder continues to hold 100%, although partly indirectly, post-amalgamation of the company having brought forward losses"

Copied!
3
0
0

Teks penuh

(1)

Tax Insights

from India Tax & Regulatory Services

www.pwc.in

Tribunal holds section 79 not

applicable where the shareholder continues to hold 100%, although partly indirectly, post-

amalgamation of the company having brought forward losses

October 14, 2019

In brief

The Mumbai bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal1 (Tribunal) in the case of the taxpayer held that the condition under section 79 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act) for carry forward and set-off of loss, is said to be satisfied if the beneficial shareholders of the company during the year when the loss was incurred, directly or indirectly holds at least 51% shares in the said company during the year of set- off.

In detail

Facts

• The taxpayer company (taxpayer) had set-off brought forward loss during assessment year 2012-13. The taxpayer had entered into a scheme of amalgamation with a fellow subsidiary which then subsequently merged with the taxpayer.

Pursuant to the scheme, the taxpayer issued shares to the shareholders of the transferor’s fellow

subsidiary, which also was a fellow subsidiary of the taxpayer. Consequently, the immediate holding company of the taxpayer, who was holding 100%

1 ITA No. 2366/ Mum/ 2019

shares in the taxpayer, continued to directly hold 42.19% shares in the taxpayer and indirectly continued to hold balance 57.81% shares through it’s subsidiaries.

• The Tax Officer (TO) completed the assessment without allowing set-off of the brought forward losses.

However, on a rectification application, the TO

allowed the set-off of the brought forward losses to the taxpayer.

• Subsequently, the

Commissioner of Income- tax invoked his revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act directing the TO to disallow the losses of

earlier years on the ground that the taxpayer had violated the provisions of section 79 of the Act and cancelled the order under section 154 of the Act.

Issue before the Tribunal Whether the provisions of section 79 of the Act were violated, when the immediate holding company continued to directly hold 42.19% shares and indirectly hold 57.81%

shares?

Taxpayer’s contentions The provisions of section 79 of the Act were not violated, as even after the scheme of amalgamation, the original shareholder, directly and indirectly, continued to

(2)

Tax Insights

2 pwc

exercise 100% voting rights over the taxpayer.

Revenue’s contention

The immediate shareholding and not the ultimate ownership of shares that needs to be

considered for section 79 of the Act as held by the Mumbai bench of the Tribunal2, and the Delhi High Court3 in their respective judgements.

Tribunal’s ruling

The case of the taxpayer was fully covered by the Ahmedabad bench of the Tribunal’s ruling4 and the

2 M/s Tainwala Trading and Investments Company Limited v. ACIT [ITA

No.5120/Mum/2009]

Karnataka High Court’s decision5, wherein it was held that beneficial ownership and not legal

ownership is relevant for the purposes of satisfying the conditions prescribed in section 79 of the Act. Section 79 of the Act only mandates that the existing shareholders should beneficially hold the shares.

Since, the beneficial owner pre- amalgamation continued to remain the beneficial owner of 100% shares, partially directly and indirectly through its subsidiary, even after the amalgamation, the taxpayer

3 Yum Restaurants (India) Private Limited v. ITO [2016] 237 Taxman 652 (Delhi)

4 CLP Power India Private Limited v. DCIT [2018] 170 ITD 744 (Ahd)

complied with the provisions of section 79 of the Act.

The takeaways

This judgement reaffirms that the continuity of the ultimate

beneficial ownership, and not immediate direct ownership, is required to satisfy the conditions of carry forward and set-off of losses under section 79 of the Act.

Let’s talk

For a deeper discussion of how this issue might affect your business, please contact your local PwC advisor

5 CIT v. AMCO Power Systems Limited [2015] 379 ITR 375 (Karnataka)

(3)

Tax Insights

For private circulation only

This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, PwCPL, its members, employees and agents accept no liability, and disclaim all responsibility, for the consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. Without prior permission of PwCPL, this publication may not be quoted in whole or in part or otherwise referred to in any documents.

© 2019 PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited. All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Private Limited (a limited liability company in India having Corporate Identity Number or CIN : U74140WB1983PTC036093), which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited (PwCIL), each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.

About PwC

At PwC, our purpose is to build trust in society and solve important problems. We’re a network of firms in 157 countries with over 276,000 people who are committed to delivering quality in assurance, advisory and tax services.

Find out more and tell us what matters to you by visiting us at www.pwc.com.

In India, PwC has offices in these cities: Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Bhopal, Chennai, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Mumbai, Pune and Raipur. For more information about PwC India’s service offerings, visit www.pwc.in

PwC refers to the PwC network and/or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.

© 2019 PwC. All rights reserved

Follow us on:

Our Offices

Ahmedabad Bengaluru Chennai

1701, 17th Floor, Shapath V, Opp. Karnavati Club, S G Highway,

Ahmedabad – 380051 Gujarat

+91-79 3091 7000

6th Floor

Millenia Tower ‘D’

1 & 2, Murphy Road, Ulsoor, Bengaluru – 560 008 Karnataka

+91-80 4079 7000

8th Floor

Prestige Palladium Bayan 129-140 Greams Road Chennai – 600 006 Tamil Nadu

+91 44 4228 5000

Hyderabad Kolkata Mumbai

Plot no. 77/A, 8-2-624/A/1, 4th Floor, Road No. 10, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500034

Telangana

+91-40 44246000

56 & 57, Block DN.

Ground Floor, A- Wing Sector - V, Salt Lake Kolkata – 700 091 West Bengal

+91-033 2357 9101/

4400 1111

PwC House Plot No. 18A,

Guru Nanak Road(Station Road), Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050 Maharashtra

+91-22 6689 1000

Gurgaon Pune For more information

Building No. 10, Tower - C 17th & 18th Floor,

DLF Cyber City, Gurgaon – 122002 Haryana

+91-124 330 6000

7th Floor, Tower A - Wing 1, Business Bay, Airport Road, Yerwada, Pune – 411 006 Maharashtra

+91-20 4100 4444

Contact us at

[email protected]

Referensi

Dokumen terkait

Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services www.pwc.in Delhi bench of Tribunal holds that acquisition of shares in a scheme of arrangement and merely showing it as

Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services www.pwc.in Tribunal holds that valuation of shares under section 562viib of the Act, based on the fair value of assets, cannot

www.pwc.in Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services Tribunal holds section 50D applies where land transferred under a JDA; rejects adoption of future cost of

Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services www.pwc.in Tribunal holds that TO cannot tinker with prescribed valuation method adopted by taxpayer for computation under

Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services www.pwc.in Tribunal holds that long-term capital loss, on STT paid sale of listed shares, is eligible for carry forward and

Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services www.pwc.in Tribunal holds slump sale of business to be succession for depreciation in the hands of purchaser; allows

Tax Insights from India Tax & Regulatory Services www.pwc.in Tribunal holds that units of an equity-oriented mutual fund are not “shares” for purposes of the article relating to