Section 115JC(1) — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section 115JC(1), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
M/s DFE Pharma India LLP v DCIT — AMT is charged on total income, so brought-forward losses are set off first
ITATHelps taxpayerValidity unconfirmed
The Assessing Officer accepted nil income under the normal computation after setting off brought-forward losses, but then charged AMT at 18.5 per cent on the net profit without allowing that set-off. Can he compute total income one way for the normal provisions and another way for AMT?
No. Section 115JC charges the minimum tax on adjusted total income, and adjusted total income starts from the total income, which by s.2(45) is computed after giving effect to the provisions of the Act — including the set-off of brought-forward losses under s.72. The Assessing Officer's contrary interpretation, treating total income as net profit for AMT purposes only, was rejected.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.