Pages

Friday, March 30, 2012

Section 80-IB(10): Multiple Housing Projects On 1 Acre Plot Permissible: B'Bay High Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:23 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 80-IB(10): Multiple Housing Projects On 1 Acre Plot Permissible: B'Bay High Court
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


CIT vs. M/s.Vandana Properties (Bombay High Court)


S. 80-IB(10): Multiple Housing Projects On 1 Acre Plot Permissible

 

The High Court had to consider the following questions on interpretation of s. 80-IB(10): (i) what is a "housing project" u/s 80-IB(10)?, (ii) whether if approval for construction of 'E' building was granted by the local authority subject to the conditions set out in the first approval granted on 12.5.1993 for construction of A and B building, construction of 'E' building is an "extension" of the earlier housing project for which approval was granted prior to 1.10.1998 and, therefore, benefit of s. 80IB (10) cannot be granted?, (iii) whether the housing project must be on a vacant plot of land which has minimum area of one acre and if there are multiple buildings and the proportionate area for each building is less than one acre, s. 80-IB(10) can be denied?, whether the merger of two flats into one so as to exceed the maximum size of 1000 sq feet violates the condition set out in s. 80IB (10)? HELD by the High Court:

 

(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,



A Comprehensive Guide To Changes In Service-tax Law In Finance Bill 2012


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:05 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs A Comprehensive Guide To Changes In Service-tax Law In Finance Bill 2012
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,


A Comprehensive Guide To Changes In Service-tax Law In Finance Bill 2012


The Negative List Taxation introduced by the Finance Bill 2012 substantially reinvents the law on Service Tax and will have a deep impact on service transactions. The authors, CA Rajkamal Shah & CA Ashit Shah, well known experts in the field of service-tax, have meticulously studied the entire law on the subject and have explained the implications of the proposed amendments in a succinct and clear manner.


A pdf copy of the Guide is available for download




The Guide is a must-read for every professional dealing with service-tax matters.


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Monthly Digest of Imp Case Laws (Feb 2012) is available for download


Thursday, March 29, 2012

Section 14A & Rule 8D Disallowance Cannot Exceed Total Expenditure: ITAT Delhi



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:16 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 14A & Rule 8D Disallowance Cannot Exceed Total Expenditure: ITAT Delhi
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Gillette Group India Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)



S. 14A & Rule 8D Disallowance Cannot Exceed Total Expenditure

 

In AY 2008-09, the assessee earned tax-free dividend income. Its' total expenditure as per the P&L A/c was Rs. 49 lakhs. The AO applied Rule 8D and made a disallowance u/s 14A of Rs. 2.37 crores which was reduced by the CIT (A) to Rs. 1.78 crores. Before the Tribunal, the assessee claimed that even assuming that the entire expenditure had been incurred to earn the dividend, the disallowance u/s 14A & Rule 8D could not exceed the expenditure incurred. HELD accepting the plea:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Appointment of ITOs As Assistant Commissioners of Income-tax




How To Seek Online Rectification Of S. 143(1) Intimation: CPC Manual

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:38 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs How To Seek Online Rectification Of S. 143(1) Intimation: CPC Manual
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,


How To Seek Online Rectification Of S. 143(1) Intimation: CPC Manual


The Centralized Processing Center ('CPC'), Bangalore, of the income-tax department has released a Manual-cum-Guide on how to submit Online Rectification Request to rectify intimation order issued under section 143 (1). The Manual explains the common errors that one will encounter during the process and explains how they can be resolved. The Manual will help preparation of an accurate rectification request and ensure proper resolution from CPC and issue of a rectification order


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

CIT vs. Machino Plastic Ltd (Delhi High Court) In remand, s. 14A disallowance cannot exceed original disallowance




Maharashtra State Budget Highlights 2012-13

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <admin@zawarassociate.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 5:53 PM
Subject: State Budget Highlights 2012-13


Dear Sir,

"Have a Great Day"

Please find the attachment of State Budget Highlights 2012-13 COMPILED BY MR. PANKAJ PALLOD. WE look forward to your valuable feedback/suggestion. 

Thanks.

Click here:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=1xdkS1cNN_fdCIWk-BSbXBboiftiYjlrlGAPnc5np3iXlYBC1f1V10PUcsrZ5


Regards,

Rajendra G. Zawar



Monday, March 26, 2012

Section 14A Disallowance In Remand Cannot Exceed Original Disallowance: Delhi High Court


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:02 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 14A Disallowance In Remand Cannot Exceed Original Disallowance: Delhi High Court
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


CIT vs. Machino Plastic Ltd (Delhi High Court)

In remand, s. 14A disallowance cannot exceed original disallowance

 

The AO made a disallowance u/s 14A of Rs. 45 Lakhs on the ground that the assessee had not been able to segregate expenses relating to earning of dividend income and that borrowed funds had been used to fund the investments. The CIT (A) reduced the quantum of disallowance & the department accepted that. In the assessee's appeal, the Tribunal totally deleted the disallowance. On appeal by the department, HELD:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Quippo Telecom Infrastructure Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) In computing book profits u/s 115JA/JB, if actual expenditure to earn tax-free income not debited in P&L A/c, s. 14A cannot apply



Section 14A Disallowance Whilst Computing Book Profits U/s 115JA/JB: ITAT Delhi & Mumbai

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:01 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs No S. 14A Disallowance Whilst Computing Book Profits U/s 115JA/JB: ITAT Delhi & Mumbai
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Quippo Telecom Infrastructure Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

In computing book profits u/s 115JA/JB, if actual expenditure to earn tax-free income not debited in P&L A/c, s. 14A cannot apply

 

For AY 2007-08, the assessee invested Rs. 10 crores in shares and units. The assessee claimed that it had incurred no expenditure to earn tax-free income though the AO & CIT (A) made a disallowance of Rs. 19.58 lakhs u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D. Before the Tribunal, the assessee claimed that (i) Rule 8D could not apply to AY 2007-08 and (ii) No disallowance u/s 14A could be made for purposes of computing book profits u/s 115JB. HELD by the Tribunal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,



Sunday, March 25, 2012

High Court Bares Fangs At Dept's Stay Recovery Mania: Issues Guidelines For Stay Orders

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:30 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs High Court Bares Fangs At Dept's Stay Recovery Mania: Issues Guidelines For Stay Orders
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


UTI Mutual Fund vs. ITO (Bombay High Court)



S. 220(6): Guidelines laid down on how stay applications should be dealt with

 

The assessee, a mutual fund, was a beneficiary of a trust named India Corporate Loan Securitisation Trust which was set up for securitising a loan of Rs.300 crores by issue of Pass Through Certificates (PTCs). The assessee had subscribed to the PTCs and its beneficial interest was proportionate to the PTCs subscribed. The Trust received interest of Rs.21.49 crores in respect of a loan and distributed the income to its beneficiaries in their respective shares. The AO passed an assessment order on the trust in the capacity of an AOP. Though a stay application was filed, the AO, without disposing of the stay application, demanded that 50% of the demand be paid. He also directed the assessee to pay Rs. 9.63 crores on the ground that it was a member of the AOP (Trust) and was jointly and severally liable in respect of the demand against the AOP. The assessee filed a stay application which was disposed of by the AO on 9.3.2012 (received by the assessee on 13.3.2012. On 12.3.2012, the AO attached the assessee's bank account u/s 226(3). The assessee filed a Writ Petition pointing out that the action had been in pursuance of the CBDT Chairman's letter dated 7.2.2012 promising postings commensurate with tax recovery. HELD by the High Court:

 

(Click Here To Read More)

High Court Notes AO’s “Consistent Failure” To Follow Binding Law In Stay Orders

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:11 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs High Court Notes AO's "Consistent Failure" To Follow Binding Law In Stay Orders
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Tata Toyo Radiators Pvt Ltd vs. UOI (Bombay High Court)

S. 220(6): AO must pass reasoned order to deal with stay applications

 

The AO passed an assessment order raising a demand of Rs.5.76 Crores. The assessee filed a stay application stating that the CIT (A) had heard the appeal and stay of demand be granted till the order on the appeal. The AO rejected the stay application and directed that the demand be paid without giving any reasons. The assessee approached the Addl CIT who noted that as the AO had already started recovery proceedings, there was no point before him to consider. The assessee's bank accounts were attached u/s 226(3). The assessee filed a Writ Petition. HELD by the Court:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Nishith Madanlal Desai vs. CIT (Bombay High Court) AO & appellate authorities are not mere tax gatherers; have duty to be fair to the assessee





Mistakes in CPC Processing

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: shrikant kulkarni <kulshree@eth.net>
Date: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 11:33 AM
Subject: {jalgaoncas} RE: [casofpune] Mistakes in CPC Processing
To: casofpune@yahoogroups.com, aurangabad_ca@yahoogroups.com, jalgaoncas@googlegroups.com


In a similar situation of 26AS mismatch, on enquiry ITO informed me that they do not have access to 26AS record but dept provide them PAN base tax collection information as per IT Dept. record!

Question is when IT dept. provided information Window with the help of NSDL, same Database should be use by the IT Dept. also.

 

In case of my client Online Status of Assessment shows No Demand or Refund – while AO is demanding Rs. 50,000/- - Refund intimation received from SBI shows Rs. 13,000/- refund adjusted to AY 08-09 demand.

Three different version for one AY.

 

Feeling of client- his consultant had not done the correct job.

CA. Shrikant

 

 

From: casofpune@yahoogroups.com [mailto:casofpune@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of WRO0208854 Dipesh Gundesha
Sent: 21 March 2012 19:00
To: casofpune@yahoogroups.com; aurangabad_ca@yahoogroups.com; jalgaoncas@googlegroups.com
Subject: [casofpune] Mistakes in CPC Processing

 

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

    Time and again it is found that there are many mistakes creeping in intimations u/s 143(1) sent by CPC. When the matter is taken up to CPC, they simply advice that it is due to mistake in filling return and advice to check common errors list. When the same issue is taken up with AO, they agree about the mistake and say that they are helpless in the matter and advice to file rectification application. However many a times rectification applications are either rejected or re-processed in similar manner as processed earlier maintaining erroneous demands.

   One such peculiar case is about charging interest on tax arisen out of income offered u/s 44AD. Law does not require assessee offering income u/s 44AD to pay advance tax. However CPC is charging interest u/s 234B and C in such cases and raising demands. Even if rectification application is filled for such intimations, they are re-processed and same demand is again raised. This is causing undue hardship to assessee as well as to us as it is increasing unnecessary work load and also creating doubts in the mind of assessee.

   Even there are many other issues with CPC processing (like non credit of tax payment even if it is shown in Form 26AS, not taking into consideration extended due dates of filling return, etc). While talking with many ITO, they admit that there are many defects in processing software and even they are fed up of such processing mistakes.

   So our council should raise strong voice at appropriate level and address the issue asap. Although are attempts are made by council, it should be speed up and atleast stay must be made on recovery of such erroneous demands as they are adjusting genuine refunds against such erroneous demands.

 

You may please share your views and experiences in this regard.

 

Regards,

CA Dipesh Gundesha

Kolhapur

9823770030

__._,_.___



Thursday, March 22, 2012

Bank Branch Audit Policy has been finalised:

Bank Branch Audit Policy has been finalised:
All branches having advances above Rs.6 Cr and 1/3rd of remaining branches will be Audited.

Happy New Year!
Gudhi Padvyachya Hardik Shubhechya!

Regards,
-------
CA.C.V.PAWAR

Vodafone & The Art Of Writing Judgements

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:38 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Vodafone & The Art Of Writing Judgements
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,


Vodafone & The Art Of Writing Judgements


Hon'ble Shri. D. Manmohan uses his vast experience as a lawyer & Judge to explain how a judgement should be written. He cites the example of Vodafone International vs. UOI as a 'model' judgement for the way it has been structured. He also gives several other examples of judgements written by Lord Denning, Krishna Reddy & other Law Lords and emphasizes that Judges must use simple and clear language in their judgements


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,




Vodafone Review Order Available For Download

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 8:53 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Vodafone Review Order Available For Download
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important order is available for download at itatonline.org.


UOI vs. Vodafone International Holding (Supreme Court) (Review Petition)


Review Petition dismissed

 

Pursuant to the judgement in Vodafone International Holdings B.V. vs. UOI holding that Vodafone was not liable to pay capital gains on the transfer of shares, the Union of India filed a review petition in the Supreme Court seeking a review of the aforesaid judgement. HELD by the Supreme Court dismissing the review petition:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,



Vodafone Not Liable Under Retrospective Law: Soli Dastur


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Vodafone Not Liable Under Retrospective Law: Soli Dastur
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,


Vodafone Not Liable Under Retrospective Law: Soli Dastur


Eminent Senior Advocate Mr. S. E. Dastur considers whether the retrospective amendments proposed in the Finance Bill 2012 to nullify the Supreme Court's verdict in Vodafone International are constitutional and achieve their purpose. He opines that the provisions are unreasonable & arbitrary and explains why they may not stand up to challenge



(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

UOI vs. Vodafone International Holding (Supreme Court) (Review Petition)



Clarification Re Individual Advocates Not Liable To Pay Service-Tax


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:24 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Clarification Re Individual Advocates Not Liable To Pay Service-Tax
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,


Clarification Re: Individual Advocates Not Liable To Pay Service-Tax



We have received a number of queries as to the effective date of the aforesaid Notification. This has now been clarified at the above link.


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

The Qualities Of A Good Judge by Hon'ble Justice R. V. Easwar, Judge, Delhi High Court



Sunday, March 18, 2012

Section 40A(3) Cash Payment Disallowance: High Court Takes Liberal View

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 2:26 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 40A(3) Cash Payment Disallowance: High Court Takes Liberal View
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Basu Distributor Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court)


S. 40A(3): Financial crises may be "exceptional or unavoidable circumstance" for cash payment

 

The assessee made payments exceeding Rs. 10,000 in cash and claimed that a disallowance u/s 40A(3) read with Rule 6DD(j) & Circular No.220 dated 31.05.1997 could not be made as a payment by cheque etc was not possible due to "exceptional or unavoidable circumstances" etc. The Tribunal rejected the assessee's claim on the ground that that the assessee's explanation that the payees would not accept cheques as they had been dishonoured on earlier occasions was "fantastic and fanciful" as in such case the assessee could have deposited cash and obtained bank drafts. It was also held that the assessee had not explained how it obtained the cash for making the payments & if the amounts were borrowed, there was a violation of s.269SS. On appeal by the assessee to the High Court, HELD reversing the Tribunal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,



Section 80-I, Even “Dependent” Unit Can Be “New Industrial Undertaking”: Guj HC


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 2:26 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs For s. 80-I, Even "Dependent" Unit Can Be "New Industrial Undertaking": Guj HC
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd vs. CIT (Gujarat High Court)


S. 80-I: Despite "Dependence" on Old Unit, Unit Can Be "New Industrial Undertaking"

 

The assessee had a plant to produce caustic soda. It increased capacity from 37425 MT to 70425 MT by installing "12 new cells" and incurred expenditure of Rs.7.5 crore towards new machinery and plant added to the existing plant. The assessee claimed that a "new industrial undertaking" had come into being which was eligible for relief u/s 80-I. The AO, CIT (A) & Tribunal disallowed the claim on the ground that it was a case of substantial expansion and not a "new industrial undertaking" on the ground that though new plant and machinery by investing substantial funds had been installed, the undertaking was not an "integral unit by itself" but was dependent on the old undertaking for its functioning. On appeal by the assessee to the High Court, HELD reversing the lower authorities:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Basu Distributor Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT (Delhi High Court) S. 40A(3): Financial crises may be "exceptional or unavoidable circumstance" for cash payment



Input Service Distributors Suffocated - Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is being substituted

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rebecca Andrews <rebecca.andrews88@yahoo.in>
Date: Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 6:56 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Input Service Distributors Suffocated - Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is being substituted
To:


 

Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is being substituted w.e.f 01.04.2012 to suffocate Input Service Distributors 

By TIOL 


 RULE 2(m) of CCR, 2004 defines "Input Service Distributor" thus –

"input service distributor" means an office of the manufacturer or producer of final products or provider of output service, which receives invoices issued under rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 towards purchases of input services and issues invoice, bill or, as the case may be, challan for the purposes of distributing the credit of service tax paid on the said services to such manufacturer or producer or provider, as the case may be;

Probably mathematicians rule the roost in the TRU. Almost all the CENVAT rules which extend any benefit to an assessee are to be worked mathematically. Take a look at the new rule 7 of CCR, 2004 concerning "Input Service Distributors".

Notification 18/2012-CE(NT) dated 17.03.2012 substitutes the current rule 7 of the CCR, 2004. The new rule 7 of CCR, 2004 comes into effect from 01.04.2012 and would read thus –

"7. Manner of distribution of credit by input service distributor. – The input service distributor may distribute the CENVAT credit in respect of the service tax paid on the input service to its manufacturing units or units providing output service, subject to the following conditions, namely:-

++ The credit distributed against a document referred to in rule 9 does not exceed the amount of service tax paid thereon;

++ Credit of service tax attributable to service used in a unit exclusively engaged in manufacture of exempted goods or providing of exempted services shall not be distributed;

++   Credit of service tax attributable to service used wholly in a unit shall be distributed only to that unit; and

++ Credit of service tax attributable to service used in more than one unit shall be distributed pro-rata on the basis of the turnover of the concerned unit to the sum total of the turnover of all the units to which the service relates.

Explanation 1. - For the purposes of this rule, "unit" includes the premises of a provider of output service and the premises of a manufacturer including the factory, whether registered or otherwise.

Explanation 2. - For the purposes of this rule, the total turnover shall be determined in the same manner as determined under rule 5."

The computation of "total turnover" is laid down in the new rule 5 which too has been substituted by the captioned notification 18/2012-CE(NT) and the same is defined thus –

"(E) "Total Turnover" means sum total of the value of –

(a) All excisable goods cleared during the relevant period including exempted goods, dutiable goods and excisable goods exported;

(b) Export turnover of services determined in terms of clause (D) of sub-rule (1) above and the value of all other services, during the relevant period; and

(c)  All inputs removed as such under sub-rule (5) of rule 3 against an invoice, during the period for which the claim is filed."

The above amendments could possibly have been influenced on account of the fact that the department was on the verge of losing several cases – at least the future would be secured!

Take a look at some of the CESTAT decisions in this regard where it is held that -

ST - Head Office as Input Service Distributor distributing service tax paid on Input services - there is nothing in law which requires that input Services ought to have been used in factory where credit is taken - Stay granted: CESTAT

+ Tata Steel Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai 2011-TIOL-1675-CESTAT-Mum

+ Tata Steel Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai 2010-TIOL-1851-CESTAT-Mum

+ Ecof Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore 2009-TIOL-2109-CESTAT-Bang

Nonetheless, the CESTAT had in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. vs. CCE, Pune-I 2011-TIOL-1581-CESTAT-Mum also held thus -

"Purpose of providing input service tax distribution is in context of 'common services' availed by various units of single corporate entity - It is not mechanism for transfer of credit from one unit to another - If the appellant wanted such facility, then they should registered themselves as a Large Tax Payer unit and only when they register as a Large Tax Payer unit, they could transfer credit from one unit to another - Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT"

Be that as it may, since the definition of "unit" is inclusive in nature, it would include the 'office premises' also and this can lead to unwarranted dispute.

So, after rule 6 of the CCR, 2004, it is time for Rule 7 to see some action in the days to come!

__._,_.___


Friday, March 16, 2012

Budget 2012-13


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <dtax@zawarassociate.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:59 PM


Dear Sir,

"Have a Great Day"

Please find the attachment of Budget Highlights 2012-13

I look forward to your valuable feedback/suggestion. Important Direct Tax Proposals in detail will be communicated to you shortly.

Click here:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=1nzp2vb5vcrGZ1OTaJA_3yBc2gX1qpfXjNGPdCOLOT71DjyjvrY7BdT29uXV-


Thanks.

Regards,

Rajendra G. Zawar

B.com, FCA, AICWA, DCA

Zawar Associates

Chartered Accountants

8/129, Mhada Complex,

Opp. Vishal mega mart,

Station road,

Aurangabad – 431005

Ph. No. (0240) 2350305, 6629351

Mob. No. 9423456220


Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Despite section 80-IB(10) Retro Amendment, s. 147 (within 4 years) Invalid: Guj High Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:05 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Despite s. 80-IB(10) Retro Amendment, s. 147 (within 4 years) Invalid: Guj High Court
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Ganesh Housing Corporation Ltd vs. DCIT (Gujarat High Court)


S. 147 Reopening, even within 4 years, on basis of retrospective amendment to s. 80-IB(10) invalid

 

For AY 2006-07, the assessee claimed s. 80-IB(10) deduction of Rs. 11.38 crores which was accepted by the AO in s. 143(3) assessment. Subsequently, within 4 years from the end of the AY, the AO reopened the assessment u/s 148 on the ground that the assessee had not complied with s. 80-IB(10) including that after the insertion of the Explanation to s. 80-IB(10) by the FA (No. 2) Act 2009 w.r.e.f. 1.4.2000, a contractor was not eligible for deduction u/s 80-IB(10). The assessee challenged the s.148 notice by a Writ Petition. HELD allowing the Petition:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

ITO vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd (Delhi High Court) S. 263 Revision: CIT must give finding on merits & cannot simply remand to AO

__

Indecisive Section 263 Revision Order Void: Delhi High Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Indecisive S. 263 Revision Order Void: Delhi High Court
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


ITO vs. DG Housing Projects Ltd (Delhi High Court)


S. 263 Revision: CIT must give finding on merits & cannot simply remand to AO

 

The assessee purchased property for Rs.69.63 lacs in 1997, yielding a rent of Rs.2.05 lacs per month, and sold it for Rs.70 lacs in 2003. The assessee claimed indexation loss which was accepted by the AO. The CIT passed an order u/s 263 holding that a high-yielding asset could not be disposed off at such a low value and that the assessment order was erroneous & prejudicial to the interests of the revenue as the AO had not examined the aspect of full value of consideration receivable by the assessee. The Tribunal reversed the CIT on the ground that he had not come to the conclusion that the actual receipt of consideration was more than what was declared in the return. On appeal by the department to the High Court, HELD dismissing the appeal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Killick Nixon Ltd vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court) Transaction within four corners of law can be treated as "sham" & "colourable device" by looking at "human probabilities"




Tuesday, March 13, 2012

CA reprimanded by high court

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CA. Rahul Bajaj <ca.rahulbajaj@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 7:01 PM
Subject: NashiCAs CA reprimanded by high court
To: Nasik CAs <nashicas@googlegroups.com>


Council of ICAI vs. Ajay Kumar Gupta (Delhi High Court)


CA issuing wrong s. 80HHC certificate is guilty of "gross professional misconduct"

 

The CIT, Delhi, filed a complaint before the ICAI that the Respondent-CA had issued an audit report in Form No. 10CCAC certifying that the assessee had exports and that it was eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC of Rs. 18.32 lakhs. However, during the assessment, the claim was found to be false and the assessee admitted that. The assessee's accounts showed that sale proceeds had not been realized within the prescribed period of 6 months. After enquiry, the ICAI held the CA to be guilty of professional misconduct under clause (7) of Part- I of the Second Schedule read with s. 22 & 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. It recommended that the CA's name be removed from the Register of Members for a period of three years and filed a reference seeking confirmation of that. In his defence, the CA argued that he had practiced for 21 years without a single incident of professional misconduct or negligence and that he could not put up his defence properly because he had suffered paralytic attack and the assessee had taken away the file and that a lenient view should be taken. HELD by the High Court:

 

(i) The Accountants' profession occupies a place of pride amongst various professions of the world and makes observance of professional duties and propriety more imperative. When conduct of a member of the profession is contrary to honesty, or opposed to good morals, or is unethical, it is misconduct-warranting consequences indicated in the Statute. A breach of confidence is a stigma not only on the individual concerned, but is also likely to have effect on credibility of the profession as a whole.

 

(ii) The CA's explanation that the assessee had taken away the file and that he suffered a paralytic stroke does not inspire any confidence because the relevant documents and information were supplied to him. The assessee accepted the fact that the s. 80HHC claim was not maintainable during the assessment proceedings. Once it is established that no payment was received against the export, the certificate issued by the CA was false. It is a bogey raised by the CA that he has verified all the documents and only then issued the certificate. On the quantum of punishment, on the one hand, the CA pleads his sickness, has an otherwise unblemished practice of 21 years and the incident is old. On the other hand, the misconduct is of serious nature because submitting a false/bogus certificate to the client to enable him to make false claim of deduction under the Income-tax Act, is of serious offence. That the CA made an attempt to dupe the tax authorities and help the assessee to avoid the tax to that extent such a conduct has to be taken seriously. He accordingly cannot be let off merely by giving him reprimand. Some penalty needs to be imposed so that it acts as deterrent and such professional misconduct are not committed. Weighing the circumstances, the ends of justice would be subserved by removing his name from the Register of Members for a period of six months.


--
warm regards,
CA. Rahul Bajaj

Partner - M/s. Rahul Bajaj & Co.
Chartered Accountants
B-4, Anudeep Park, Nr Tupsakhare Lawns, Tidke Colony, Nasik 422002 MS India
Call @ 91-253-2314120, 9371114120
url: www.rbc-india.com


Judges Who “Outsource” Judgements Can Be Dismissed Without Enquiry: Supreme Court

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 3:59 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Judges Who "Outsource" Judgements Can Be Dismissed Without Enquiry: Supreme Court
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Ajit Kumar vs. State of Jharkhand (Supreme Court)


Judge alleged to have "outsourced" judgements can be dismissed without opportunity of hearing or enquiry

 

The appellant was appointed sub-ordinate Judge in the Garhwa Civil Court. The Inspecting Judge inspected the records of the Civil Court and submitted a confidential report to the Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court that the appellant did not prepare judgments on his own but got it prepared by some body else before delivering the judgments. The Chief Justice referred the matter to the Full Court. The Full Court resolved that the appellant be recommended for removal from service without any enquiry as it was felt that it was not practicable in the interest of the institution to hold an inquiry since it may lead to the question of validity of several judgments rendered by him. Pursuant to that resolution, the Governor exercised power under proviso (b) to Article 311(2) of the Constitution and removed the appellant from service. This was unsuccessfully challenged before the High Court. In appeal before the Supreme Court, it was argued that an enquiry for the purpose of removal of a judicial officer could not be dispensed with. It was also claimed that there was no evidence to show that the appellant was guilty of any misconduct as alleged. HELD dismissing the appeal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Download Report of Standing Committee on Direct Tax Code Bill 2010



Dear Judges, Why Punish Citizens For AO’s Incompetence?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 5:03 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Dear Judges, Why Punish Citizens For AO's Incompetence?
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,



The following blog post by CA Vellalapatti Swaminathan Iyer is available:


Dear Judges, Why Punish Citizens For AO's Incompetence?



The author is upset at the recent judgement of the Supreme Court in Post Master vs. Living Media India that if the department delays filing an appeal without sufficient cause, the appeal has to be dismissed to "teach the department a lesson". This amounts to punishing innocent citizens for the incompetence of one officer says the author. Instead, the incompetent officer(s) should be made to pay costs from his pocket to "teach him a lesson" rather than to dismiss the appeal and prejudice innocent citizens, argues the author.


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Chief Post Master General vs. Living Media India Ltd (Supreme Court) Delay by Department in filing appeal cannot be mechanically condoned



Impact Of Vodafone Verdict On Tax Planning: High Court Explains Law


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 12:43 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Impact Of Vodafone Verdict On Tax Planning: High Court Explains Law
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Killick Nixon Ltd vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court)


Transaction within four corners of law can be treated as "sham" & "colourable device" by looking at "human probabilities"

 

In AY 2000-01 the assessee borrowed Rs. 48 crores from the G. K. Rathi group and used that to buy shares in three 100% subsidiary companies. Though the fair value of the shares was Rs. 24, the assessee paid Rs. 150 for each share. The amount received by the said subsidiary companies was transferred back to another company of the G.K. Rathi group. In AY 2001-02, the said shares were sold for Rs. 5 each and a short-term capital loss was claimed and this was set-off against other long-term capital gains. The AO, CIT (A) & Tribunal (order attached) rejected the transaction of investment into, and sale of, shares as a sham. On appeal by the assessee, HELD dismissing the appeal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Dear Judges, Why Punish Citizens For AO's Incompetence?



Updates on Bank Branch Audit

Dear All,

As per latest updates; the RBI has not yet made any formal communication in relation to bank branch audit allotment.

Further, the finance ministry has not taken any decision or given any formal response in this regard.

If RBI does not make any announcement by 15th March, the bank would do the allotment as per the OLD Policy i.e. above Rs.3 cr all branches and below Rs.3 cr 1/5 of the branches.



Regards,
-------
CA.C.V.PAWAR
0253-2319641. M-9423961209

Time for filing form DIN-4 by DIN holders for furnishing PAN and to update PAN details extended



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: CA. VINAY MITTAL, GHAZIABAD <vncgzb@yahoo.co.in>
Date: Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 7:02 AM
Subject: {jalgaoncas} Time for filing form DIN-4 by DIN holders for furnishing PAN and to update PAN details extended
To: "VNCGZB02@GMAIL.COM" <VNCGZB02@gmail.com>


 
Ministry of Corporate Affairs09-March, 2012 16:53 IST
Time for filing form DIN-4 by DIN holders for furnishing PAN and to update PAN details extended
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has extended the time for filing form DIN-4 by DIN holders for furnishing PAN and to update PAN details upto 30.04.2012 for the Allotment of Director's Identification Number (DIN) under Companies Act, 1956.

Earlier this date was extended on 15/12/2011. All existing DIN holders who have not furnished their PAN earlier at the time of obtaining DIN have accordingly been advised to furnish their PAN by filing form DIN-4 by 30.04.2012 to avoid penal action.

*****


ST/-
(Release ID :80756)
With warm regards,
CA. Vinay Mittal, FCA


Saturday, March 10, 2012

Section 195 TDS Liability On Payer If Payee Not Assessed: ITAT Mumbai



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:40 PM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs No s. 195 TDS Liability On Payer If Payee Not Assessed: ITAT Mumbai
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Crompton Creaves Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)


No s. 195 TDS Liability On Payer If Payee Not Assessed

 

The assessee made a public issue of Global Depository Receipts (GDR) for which it engaged international lead managers like Jardine Fleming, Merrill Lynch etc and paid management and underwriting commission of Rs. 7.68 crores without deducting TDS. The AO & CIT (A) held that the said commission constituted "fees for technical services" and that the assessee ought to have deducted TDS u/s 195. The assessee was held to be in default u/s 201. Before the Tribunal, the assessee argued that as no action has been taken by the department against the payees and the time for taking such action had expired, no order u/s 195 & 201 could be passed. HELD by the Tribunal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,


itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

Council of ICAI vs. Ajay Kumar Gupta (Delhi High Court) CA issuing wrong s. 80HHC certificate is guilty of "gross professional misconduct"


Friday, March 9, 2012

Slump Sale u/s 50B: Special Bench Reverses Law


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:40 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs Slump Sale u/s 50B: Special Bench Reverses Law
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


DCIT vs. Summit Securities Ltd (ITAT Mumbai Special Bench)


For s. 50B "Slump Sale", liabilities reflected in "negative net worth" cannot be treated as "consideration" but the resultant "negative net worth" has to be added to the "consideration"

 

Pursuant to a scheme of arrangement u/s 391 & 394 of the Companies Act, the assessee transferred its "Power Transmission Business" to KEC International Ltd for a total consideration of Rs. 143 crores. The assessee claimed this transaction to be a "slump sale" u/s 50B. The "net worth of the undertaking" was computed at a negative figure of Rs.157.19 crores, being the excess of liabilities over assets. The assessee treated the net worth as Nil and offered the entire sale consideration of Rs. 143 crore as LTCG. The AO held that as the purchaser had taken over liabilities of Rs. 157.19 crores, the same had to be added to the consideration of Rs. 143 crores to arrive at the "full value of consideration" of Rs. 300 crores. The CIT (A), relying on Zuari Industries 105 ITD 569 (Mum) & Paper Base Co 19 SOT 163 (Del), held that the "net worth' in s. 50B could not be a negative figure and if it was so because of the liabilities exceeding the assets, the net worth had to taken at Nil. The Special Bench had to consider two issues (i) whether the excess of liabilities over assets could be treated as "consideration" in the hands of the assessee & (ii) whether the resultant "negative net worth" could be treated as Nil or had to be added to the "consideration"? HELD by the Special Bench:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,



Section 54EC Investment Time Limit: ITAT Takes Liberal View


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:06 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 54EC Investment Time Limit: ITAT Takes Liberal View
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


Chanchal Kumar Sircar vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkota)

S. 54EC investment time limit begins from date of receipt of consideration

 

The assessee entered into an agreement and handed over possession to the buyer which constituted a "transfer". The consideration received from the buyer was invested by the assessee in s. 54EC Bonds beyond 6 months from the date of transfer though within 6 months from the date of receipt of the consideration. The Tribunal had to consider whether in view of the language of s. 54EC that the consideration had to be invested in the specified bonds within 6 months of the date of transfer, the relief could be allowed. HELD by the Tribunal:


(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,



Section 54F Time Limit For Construction: High Court Takes Liberal View


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 54F Time Limit For Construction: High Court Takes Liberal View
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.

CIT vs. Sambandam Udaykumar (Karnataka High Court)

S. 54F does not require construction to be complete within specified period

 

The assessee sold shares for Rs. 4.18 crores and, within 12 months, invested Rs. 2.16 crores thereof to construct a house property and claimed exemption u/s 54F. However, as even after the expiry of 3 years of the date of transfer, the construction of the house was not complete and sale deed not executed, the AO & CIT (A) denied relief u/s 54F though the Tribunal granted it. On appeal by the department to the High Court, HELD dismissing the appeal:

 

(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,



Thursday, March 8, 2012

Liberalised Remittance Scheme for Resident Individuals

Liberalised Remittance Scheme for Resident Individuals


RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
Foreign Exchange Department
Central Office
Mumbai - 400 001
_____________________________________________________
RBI/2011-12/430                                                March 06, 2012
A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 90

To,
All Category - I Authorised Dealer Banks

Madam / Sir,

Clarification - Liberalised Remittance Scheme for Resident Individuals

1.Attention of Authorised Dealer Category - I (AD Category - I) banks is invited to A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 64 dated February 4, 2004, as amended form time to time, A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 24 dated December 20, 2006, A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 9 dated September 26, 2007, A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 51 dated May 8, 2007 and A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 32 dated October 10, 2011 on the Liberalised Remittance Scheme for Resident Individuals (the Scheme).

2. In this regard, it is clarified that:
i. The facility is available to all resident individuals including minors. In case of remitter being a minor, the LRS declaration form should be countersigned by the minor's natural guardian. Accordingly, the modified LRS application cum declaration form is enclosed;
ii. Remittances under the facility can be consolidated in respect of family members subject to individual family members complying with the terms and conditions of the scheme; and
iii. Remittances under the scheme can be used for purchasing objects of art subject to the provisions of other applicable laws such as the extant Foreign Trade Policy of the Government of India.

3. All other terms and conditions mentioned in the afore-mentioned Circulars shall remain unchanged.

4. AD - Category I banks may bring the contents of this circular to the notice of their constituents and customers concerned.

5. The directions contained in this Circular have been issued under sections 10 (4) and 11 (1) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999) and is without prejudice to permissions / approvals, if any, required under any other law.
Yours faithfully,
(Meena Hemchandra)

Chief General Manager In-Charge

Annex
[Annex to A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 90
dated March 06, 2012]

Application cum Declaration for purchase of foreign exchange under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme of USD 200,000 for Resident individuals
(To be completed by the applicant)

I. Details of the applicant
a. Name …………………………..
b. Address…………………………
c. Account No……………………..
d. PAN No………………………….

II. Details of the foreign exchange required
1. Amount (Specify currency)………………………………
2. Purpose ……………………………………………………

III. Source of funds: ………………………………………….

IV. Nature of instrument
Draft………………………..
Direct remittance…………

V. Details of the remittance made under the Scheme in the financial year (April- March) 20__ – 20__
Date :………………
Amount :………….

VI. Details of the Beneficiary
1. Name ……………………..
2. Address ……………………
3. Country ……………………
4*. Name and address of the bank……………………….
5*. Account No……………………………………………..
(* Required only when the remittance is to be directly credited to the bank account of the beneficiary)

This is to authorize you to debit my account and effect the foreign exchange remittance/ issue a draft as detailed above (strike out whichever is not applicable).

Declaration

I, ………………. …………(Name), hereby declare that the total amount of foreign exchange purchased from or remitted through, all sources in India during the financial year as per item No. V of the Application, including utilisation of the said limit on account of loan extended or gift made in rupees credited to NRO account of non-resident close relative(s), is within the limit of USD 200,000/- (US Dollar Two hundred thousand only), which is the limit prescribed by the Reserve Bank for the purpose and certify that the source of funds for making the said remittance belongs to me and will not be used for prohibited purposes.

Signature of the applicant

(Name)

Signature of the natural guardian of the applicant @
(Name)

@ Where the applicant is minor, the application should be countersigned by minor's natural guardian 

Certificate by the Authorised Dealer

This is to certify that the remittance is not being made by/ to ineligible entities and that the remittance is in conformity with the instructions issued by the Reserve Bank from time to time under the Scheme.

Name and designation of the authorised official:

Place:

Signature:

Date:

Stamp and Seal

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Section 54EC Investment Limit: ITAT Takes Strict View


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: editor@itatonline.org <itatonline.org@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 10:27 AM
Subject: Message from EGroup of SolapurCAs S. 54EC Investment Limit: ITAT Takes Strict View
To: editor@itatonline.org


 

Dear Subscriber,

 


The following important judgement is available for download at itatonline.org.


ACIT vs. Raj Kumar Jain & Sons (HUF) (ITAT Jaipur)


S. 54EC limit of Rs. 50L applies to the transaction & not financial year

 

In AY 2008-08, the assessee sold property for Rs. 2.47 crores and disclosed capital gain of Rs. 1.14 crores. To overcome the restriction in the Proviso to s. 54EC that the investment made in the specified asset "during any financial year" should not exceed Rs. 50 lakhs, the assessee, within the prescribed period of 6 months, invested Rs. 50 lakhs on 31.03.2008 (FY 2007-08) & 10.06.2008 (FY 2008-09) and claimed a deduction of Rs. 1 crore. The AO rejected the claim though the CIT (A) allowed it. On appeal by the department, HELD reversing the CIT (A):

 

(Click Here To Read More)


Regards,


Editor,