Pritika Auto Industries Receives Rs. 1,83,81,330 Income Tax Demand for AY 2025-26
Pritika Auto Industries disclosed an income tax demand of Rs. 1,83,81,330/- under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2025-26, received on May 15, 2026, from the Centralized Processing Center. The demand arose from a MAT computation error where book profit under Section 115JB was wrongly enhanced by Rs. 13,85,61,837/- on account of depreciation. The company is filing a rectification under Section 154 and an appeal before the Appellant Authority, with management confident the demand will be deleted and no material financial or operational impact anticipated.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Pritika Auto Industries has disclosed the receipt of an income tax demand notice of Rs. 1,83,81,330/- under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2025-26. The intimation, issued under Section 143(1) by the Centralized Processing Center, Income Tax Department, was received by the company on May 15, 2026, at 01:46 p.m. via email. The disclosure was made to the stock exchanges on May 16, 2026, in compliance with Regulation 30 of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015.
Details of the Tax Demand
The following table summarises the key particulars of the demand as disclosed by the company:
| Parameter: | Details |
|---|---|
| Authority: | Centralized Processing Center, Income Tax Department |
| Nature of Communication: | Intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| Demand Section: | Section 156 of Income Tax Act, 1961 |
| Demand Amount: | Rs. 1,83,81,330/- |
| Assessment Year: | 2025-26 |
| Date of Receipt: | May 15, 2026 at 01:46 p.m. (via email) |
| Date of Disclosure: | May 16, 2026 |
Reason for the Demand
According to the company, the demand has arisen due to an error in the computation of the Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT). Specifically, the book profit under Section 115JB was wrongly enhanced by Rs. 13,85,61,837/- on account of depreciation while calculating the MAT. The company has stated that this mistake is apparent from the record and does not reflect any actual violation or contravention on its part.
Company's Response and Planned Actions
Pritika Auto Industries has outlined the following steps it intends to take in response to the demand:
- Rectification Application: The company is filing a rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the Centralized Processing Center, Bangalore.
- Appeal: An appeal is being filed before the Appellant Authority.
- Management's Position: The management has stated that the mistake is rectifiable and that the demand is expected to be deleted upon disposal of the rectification and appeal proceedings.
Financial and Operational Impact
The company has stated that there is no material impact on its financials, operations, or other activities due to the demand raised for Assessment Year 2025-26 in the current financial year. No penalty, restriction, or sanction has been imposed pursuant to the communication, and no aberrations or non-compliances have been identified by the authority in the notice.
The disclosure was made by C B Gupta, Company Secretary & Compliance Officer of Pritika Auto Industries Limited, in accordance with Regulation 30 read with Para A of Part A of Schedule III of the SEBI (LODR) Regulations, 2015.
Historical Stock Returns for Pritika Auto Industries
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +6.19% | +4.45% | -4.61% | +1.81% | -24.27% | -22.48% |
If the rectification under Section 154 is rejected by the Centralized Processing Center, how long could the appellate process take and what financial provisions might Pritika Auto Industries need to make in the interim?
Could the MAT computation error related to depreciation under Section 115JB indicate systemic issues in Pritika Auto Industries' tax filing processes that may affect other assessment years?
How might prolonged resolution of this tax demand impact Pritika Auto Industries' credit rating or borrowing capacity, particularly if the company needs to furnish a deposit or bank guarantee during the appeal process?


































