Tax wrongly deducted has to be refunded0 comments Sunday, January 13, 2013
Delhi High Court has in CIT vs Lear Automotive India Ltd held that if wrong tax has been paid, it is of necessity to be returned, otherwise the Department will be charged of unjus enrichment.
In this case tax was deducted at source wrongly on the reimbursement amount also which was not at all the income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings must be kept in abeyance till disposal of quantum appeal by first appellate authority0 comments Friday, January 11, 2013
ITAT Ahemedabad has in GE India Industrial Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT(A) held that Penalty proceedings must be kept in abeyance till disposal of quantum appeal by first appellate authority
In this case penalty
proceedings have been initiated by ld. CIT(A) pursuant to enhancement
of income made by him vide his order dated 17.07.2012. The appeal
against this order has been filed before the Tribunal on 4th October,
2012 which is in fact the first appeal of the assessee against the
enhancement of income by ld. CIT(A). As the appellate proceedings are
already on, we are not going into the merits of the case.
Time limit for filing ITR-V forms for A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 extended0 comments Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Notification No. 1/2013 [F. No. DIT(S)-III/ITR-V Extension/ 2012-13] UNDER CPR SCHEME 2011, Dated 7-1-2013
In exercise of its powers under clause (ii) of Para 14 read with clause (7) of Para 4 of the 'Centralized Processing of Returns Scheme, 2011', issued
vide
CBDT Notification No. SO 16(E), dated 4-1-2012,
the Director General of Income Tax (System) hereby extends the time
limit for filing ITR-V forms relating to Income Tax Returns filed
electronically (without digital signature Certificate) for A.Y. 2010-11
[Filed during F.Y. 2011-12] and for ITRs of A.Y. 2011-12 [filed on or
after 1-4-2011] till 28th February, 2013. In respect of returns filed
for A.Y. 2012-13 for which ITR-V forms are yet to be received at CPC and
time of 120 days has also elapsed, time limit for filing of ITR-V is
extended upto 31st March, 2013 or 120 days from the date of uploading of
the electronic return data, whichever is later.
This direction is issued to mitigate the hardship and
grievance of the tax payers who have been prevented by reasonable causes
to file the ITR-V in time.
Share | Section 54F benefit available even on Value exceeding actual consideration due to deemed fiction U/s. 50C0 comments
Mumbai ITAT has held in Raj Babbar vs Income Tax Officer that deeming provisions of section 50C does not restrict exemption u/s 54F and exemption u/s 54F can extend so as to cover the deemed Full value of consideration of capital asset as determined u/s 50C. Facts: • The assessee is a Member of Parliament (MP) and a film actor. During the year relevant to the AY 2008-09, he sold a plot of land for Rs. 8 lakhs and worked out long term capital gains (LTCG) of Rs. 5,84,837. In this case the cost of acquisition after indexation worked out to Rs. 2,15,163. Rate of reversal of ITC u/s 13 of PVAT Act increased to 5%0 comments Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Rate of reversal of Input Tax Credit u/s 13 of Punjab VAT Act, 2005 has been increased from 4% to 5% w.e.f 04/12/2012. Section 13 of Punjab VAT Act provides reversal of ITC @ 4% in the following circumstances: 1. Reversal of ITC of tax paid on purchase of goods within State, if such goods are sent outside State other than by way of sale in the cource of inter-state trade or commerce or in the cource of export out of territory of India. Due date of efiling of VAT-20 extended to 11-01-20130 comments Friday, January 4, 2013
Due date of Efiling of VAT-20 under Punjab VAT Act, 2005 for the year 2011-12 has been further extended to 11th January 2013. The efiling receipt along with requisite annexures are required to be filed with the Departmnent within 10 days from the date of efiling.
 Share | CBEC's circular on recovery of confirmed demands seems unjustified0 comments
CBEC has issued a circular regarding recovery of confirmed demand during pendency of stay application. It has been directed in the circular that recovery proceedings are to be initiated within 30 days after the filing of an appeal if no stay is granted.
It is well known that hearing of cases before the appellate authorities dont come within 30 days from the date of filing of an appeal as the number of appeals is huge. Thus stay application moved may also not be heard within 30 days. In such cases if recovery proceedings are initiated then it will amount to hardship to the appellent and is also against the basic rule of law audi alteram partem i.e No one should be condemned unheard.
Schedule B of Punjab VAT Act amended Timber and scaffolding included0 comments Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Schedule B of Punjab VAT Act, 2005 has been amended so as to include "Timber" and "Scaffolding" in it. Items contained in Schedule B of Punjab VAT Act are taxable @ 5.5% and after adding additional tax of 10% the rate of tax is 6.05%. After the said amendment Timber and Scaffoldings are now taxable @ 6.05%. Non-construction of house within 3 years results disallowance of exemption u/s 54F and not postpone of tax liability0 comments Tuesday, January 1, 2013
FACTS
• The assessee had sold a property during the year and capital gain was worked out.
• The assessee invested that sum in purchasing a plot on which residential house was to be constructed.
• The assessee claimed proportionate deduction under section 54F.
• However, the house could not be constructed.
• The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed under section 54F by the assessee as no construction had taken place within specified time.
• On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld order of the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee had not started the work of construction on the said plot, therefore, the claim of deduction under section 54F was not acceptable.
Katrina kaif held not liable to pay service tax as its paid by her agent0 comments Sunday, December 30, 2012
Mumbai CESTAT in Katrina Kaif's (famous actress) case has held that once the service tax is paid by agent the assessee herself need not to pay service tax again. Since definition of assessee includes agent, where service tax liability of assessee-actress had been discharged by her agent, service tax could not be demanded from assessee-actress.
This judgement implies that service tax liability can also be discharged by agent of assessee and in which case assessee need not to pay service tax. Similarly service tax liability can also be shifted by agreement on to the service provider in cases where reverse charge is applicable. Main thing is that revenue should get its due taxes irrespective of the fact who is paying it or on whom it has been shifted by agreement between the service provider and service receiver Deduction u/s 54EC for investment made from earnest money before sale of asset whether allowable0 comments
Bombay High Court in the Mrs. Parveen P. Bharucha v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2, Pune has held that allowing deduction of investment made u/s 54EC from the earnest money/advance of the sale consideration of the Capital asset sold, was a possible view in view of CBDT's circular 359 dated 10-05-1983, which was taken by AO during assessment proceedings u/s 143(3), hence reopening on the ground that investment should have been made after the sale of the capital asset is a mere change of opinion which is not allowed.
Although this judgement is on the point of reassessment, it also brings attention towards circular No. 359 dated 10-05-1983 of CBDT wherein it was directed that deduction for investment u/s 54E(existing at the relevent time) was available even if such investment was made before the date when capital asset was sold and such investment was made out of the earnest money/advance received as being part of net sale consideration.
Sale of used cars not to be included in gross turnover, if not incidental or ancillary to business0 comments
Delhi High Court in Panacea Biotech Ltd. vs Commissioner of Trade
and Taxes has held that in pharmaceutical business sale of used car cannot be
treated as incidental or ancillary to the business and hence the sale of same
cannot be included in the gross turnover.
Entry tax deferment quarterly statement amended-certain technical flaws exist0 comments Thursday, December 27, 2012
General
circular No. N-1-2011 / spl. 31 - 60 dated
: 17.5.2011on Entry Tax deferment issued by Excise & Taxation department,
Punjab in pursuance of orders of Punjab & Haryana High Court has been amended.
The
circular has changed the format of quarterly statement of deferment claimed
from entry tax to be filed by the persons claiming deferment from the entry
tax.
Due date for efiling of VAT-20 extended0 comments Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Investment limit of 50 Lakh u/s 54EC applicable to finanical year and not to transaction0 comments Saturday, December 22, 2012
ITAT Bangalore has held in Shri Vivek Jairazbhoy Vs.Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax that limit of investment of Rs. 50 Lakh u/s 54EC of Income Tax Act, 1961 is applicable to a financial year and not to transaction that means if period of 6 months of investment u;/s 54EC spreads to two financial years then investment of more than Rs. 50 Lakh can be made in two such financial years in respect of same transaction.
Circular on taxability of set top boxes under Delhi VAT0 comments Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Commissioner, VAT, Department of Trade and Taxes, Delhi has issued a circular clarifying the taxability of set top boxes under Delhi VAT Act, 2004. It has been mentioned that set top boxes are being supplied by cable operators on lease basis against refundable securities. The circular suggest that such leasing is a deemed sale of goods as transfer of right to use goods. Concealing a receipt in return attracts penalty even if due taxes are deposited0 comments Saturday, December 15, 2012
FACTS:
The assessee's services were terminated by the foreign company with which he was employed.
The company Offered him continued employment for a limited tenure, on same terms and remuneration as before.The employer-company paid him an extraordinary compensation of VSD 10 lacs for retention and seaverance of his services.
Penalties under PVAT Act can be adjusted against Excess ITC0 comments Friday, December 14, 2012
Section 15 of PVAT Act 2005 deals with the Net Tax Payable by a taxable person. Sub section 1 of Section 15 provides that the output tax under PVAT Act shall be adjusted from the Input Tax Credit for determining Net Tax Payable by a taxable Person. If any excess ITC is still left then it is to be adjusted from the CST liability under CST Act 1956 at the option of the taxable person as per section 15(2) of PVAT Act.
Section 15(3) of PVAT Act provides that the Excess ITC if any left after adjustment of output tax or CST liability u/s 15(1) and 15(2) then such ITC shall be adjusted against any outstanding tax, Penalty or Interest under PVAT Act 2005 or CST Act 1956 as the case may be.
Public notice under PVAT regarding efiling of returns for third quarter of year 2012-130 comments Thursday, December 13, 2012
GOVT OF PUNJAB
EXCISE & TAXATION DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC NOTICE
ATTENTION: DEALERS/ ADVOCATES/ CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS
E-FILING OF QUARTERLY RETURNS FOR THE THIRD QUARTER (Q3)
No disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for short deduction of TDS0 comments Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Facts: The assessee was engaged in trading of agricultural products. During the course of assessment proceedings, from the tax audit report in Form No. 3CD the Assessing Officer noted that the tax auditor had quantified the amount of Rs. 40,41,233 disallowable under section 40(a)(ia). However, in computation of income the assessee had added back only Rs. 20,16,778. The remaining amount of Rs. 20,24,455 was therefore, disallowed by the Assessing Officer.
Before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer ought to have allowed expenditure on which tax had been deducted and should have disallowed the expenditure on which no tax had been deducted. Alternatively, it was argued that proportionate disallowance of Rs. 15,75,239 should have been made.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
Featured PostTCS to apply only on cash portion of sales transaction CBDT clarifiesWelcome clarification by CBDT on TCS on Cash Sale. CBDT vide Circular No. 23/2016 dt. 24 June 2016 has clarified on FAQs of stakeholde... 
AddThisShareThisGet updates via email, just subscribe below and click on activation link afterwards in your emailCategory
Right consultancy at right time avoids unnecessary litigation.
Popular Posts
FollowersAbout Me
FeedjitBlog Archive
WARNING
Nobody is permitted to copy or publish the articles existing on this blog on any website or on any other media without my express permission. Total PageviewsDisclaimer
No one is responsible for any claims if somebody finds that the information/opinions provided in this blog is incorrect and the blog is meant only to share knowledge and exchange views in a meaningful manner.
Useful Links
Powered by Blogger.
|
Tax wrongly deducted has to be refundedSunday, January 13, 2013
Delhi High Court has in CIT vs Lear Automotive India Ltd held that if wrong tax has been paid, it is of necessity to be returned, otherwise the Department will be charged of unjus enrichment.
In this case tax was deducted at source wrongly on the reimbursement amount also which was not at all the income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings must be kept in abeyance till disposal of quantum appeal by first appellate authorityFriday, January 11, 2013
ITAT Ahemedabad has in GE India Industrial Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT(A) held that Penalty proceedings must be kept in abeyance till disposal of quantum appeal by first appellate authority
In this case penalty
proceedings have been initiated by ld. CIT(A) pursuant to enhancement
of income made by him vide his order dated 17.07.2012. The appeal
against this order has been filed before the Tribunal on 4th October,
2012 which is in fact the first appeal of the assessee against the
enhancement of income by ld. CIT(A). As the appellate proceedings are
already on, we are not going into the merits of the case.
Time limit for filing ITR-V forms for A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 extendedWednesday, January 9, 2013
Notification No. 1/2013 [F. No. DIT(S)-III/ITR-V Extension/ 2012-13] UNDER CPR SCHEME 2011, Dated 7-1-2013
In exercise of its powers under clause (ii) of Para 14 read with clause (7) of Para 4 of the 'Centralized Processing of Returns Scheme, 2011', issued
vide
CBDT Notification No. SO 16(E), dated 4-1-2012,
the Director General of Income Tax (System) hereby extends the time
limit for filing ITR-V forms relating to Income Tax Returns filed
electronically (without digital signature Certificate) for A.Y. 2010-11
[Filed during F.Y. 2011-12] and for ITRs of A.Y. 2011-12 [filed on or
after 1-4-2011] till 28th February, 2013. In respect of returns filed
for A.Y. 2012-13 for which ITR-V forms are yet to be received at CPC and
time of 120 days has also elapsed, time limit for filing of ITR-V is
extended upto 31st March, 2013 or 120 days from the date of uploading of
the electronic return data, whichever is later.
This direction is issued to mitigate the hardship and
grievance of the tax payers who have been prevented by reasonable causes
to file the ITR-V in time.
Share | Section 54F benefit available even on Value exceeding actual consideration due to deemed fiction U/s. 50C
Mumbai ITAT has held in Raj Babbar vs Income Tax Officer that deeming provisions of section 50C does not restrict exemption u/s 54F and exemption u/s 54F can extend so as to cover the deemed Full value of consideration of capital asset as determined u/s 50C. Facts: • The assessee is a Member of Parliament (MP) and a film actor. During the year relevant to the AY 2008-09, he sold a plot of land for Rs. 8 lakhs and worked out long term capital gains (LTCG) of Rs. 5,84,837. In this case the cost of acquisition after indexation worked out to Rs. 2,15,163. Rate of reversal of ITC u/s 13 of PVAT Act increased to 5%Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Rate of reversal of Input Tax Credit u/s 13 of Punjab VAT Act, 2005 has been increased from 4% to 5% w.e.f 04/12/2012. Section 13 of Punjab VAT Act provides reversal of ITC @ 4% in the following circumstances: 1. Reversal of ITC of tax paid on purchase of goods within State, if such goods are sent outside State other than by way of sale in the cource of inter-state trade or commerce or in the cource of export out of territory of India. Due date of efiling of VAT-20 extended to 11-01-2013Friday, January 4, 2013
Due date of Efiling of VAT-20 under Punjab VAT Act, 2005 for the year 2011-12 has been further extended to 11th January 2013. The efiling receipt along with requisite annexures are required to be filed with the Departmnent within 10 days from the date of efiling.
Share | CBEC's circular on recovery of confirmed demands seems unjustified
CBEC has issued a circular regarding recovery of confirmed demand during pendency of stay application. It has been directed in the circular that recovery proceedings are to be initiated within 30 days after the filing of an appeal if no stay is granted.
It is well known that hearing of cases before the appellate authorities dont come within 30 days from the date of filing of an appeal as the number of appeals is huge. Thus stay application moved may also not be heard within 30 days. In such cases if recovery proceedings are initiated then it will amount to hardship to the appellent and is also against the basic rule of law audi alteram partem i.e No one should be condemned unheard.
Schedule B of Punjab VAT Act amended Timber and scaffolding includedWednesday, January 2, 2013
Schedule B of Punjab VAT Act, 2005 has been amended so as to include "Timber" and "Scaffolding" in it. Items contained in Schedule B of Punjab VAT Act are taxable @ 5.5% and after adding additional tax of 10% the rate of tax is 6.05%. After the said amendment Timber and Scaffoldings are now taxable @ 6.05%. Non-construction of house within 3 years results disallowance of exemption u/s 54F and not postpone of tax liabilityTuesday, January 1, 2013
FACTS
• The assessee had sold a property during the year and capital gain was worked out.
• The assessee invested that sum in purchasing a plot on which residential house was to be constructed.
• The assessee claimed proportionate deduction under section 54F.
• However, the house could not be constructed.
• The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction claimed under section 54F by the assessee as no construction had taken place within specified time.
• On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld order of the Assessing Officer observing that the assessee had not started the work of construction on the said plot, therefore, the claim of deduction under section 54F was not acceptable.
Katrina kaif held not liable to pay service tax as its paid by her agentSunday, December 30, 2012
Mumbai CESTAT in Katrina Kaif's (famous actress) case has held that once the service tax is paid by agent the assessee herself need not to pay service tax again. Since definition of assessee includes agent, where service tax liability of assessee-actress had been discharged by her agent, service tax could not be demanded from assessee-actress.
This judgement implies that service tax liability can also be discharged by agent of assessee and in which case assessee need not to pay service tax. Similarly service tax liability can also be shifted by agreement on to the service provider in cases where reverse charge is applicable. Main thing is that revenue should get its due taxes irrespective of the fact who is paying it or on whom it has been shifted by agreement between the service provider and service receiver Deduction u/s 54EC for investment made from earnest money before sale of asset whether allowable
Bombay High Court in the Mrs. Parveen P. Bharucha v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 2, Pune has held that allowing deduction of investment made u/s 54EC from the earnest money/advance of the sale consideration of the Capital asset sold, was a possible view in view of CBDT's circular 359 dated 10-05-1983, which was taken by AO during assessment proceedings u/s 143(3), hence reopening on the ground that investment should have been made after the sale of the capital asset is a mere change of opinion which is not allowed.
Although this judgement is on the point of reassessment, it also brings attention towards circular No. 359 dated 10-05-1983 of CBDT wherein it was directed that deduction for investment u/s 54E(existing at the relevent time) was available even if such investment was made before the date when capital asset was sold and such investment was made out of the earnest money/advance received as being part of net sale consideration.
Sale of used cars not to be included in gross turnover, if not incidental or ancillary to business
Delhi High Court in Panacea Biotech Ltd. vs Commissioner of Trade
and Taxes has held that in pharmaceutical business sale of used car cannot be
treated as incidental or ancillary to the business and hence the sale of same
cannot be included in the gross turnover.
Entry tax deferment quarterly statement amended-certain technical flaws existThursday, December 27, 2012
General
circular No. N-1-2011 / spl. 31 - 60 dated
: 17.5.2011on Entry Tax deferment issued by Excise & Taxation department,
Punjab in pursuance of orders of Punjab & Haryana High Court has been amended.
The
circular has changed the format of quarterly statement of deferment claimed
from entry tax to be filed by the persons claiming deferment from the entry
tax.
Due date for efiling of VAT-20 extendedWednesday, December 26, 2012
Investment limit of 50 Lakh u/s 54EC applicable to finanical year and not to transactionSaturday, December 22, 2012
ITAT Bangalore has held in Shri Vivek Jairazbhoy Vs.Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax that limit of investment of Rs. 50 Lakh u/s 54EC of Income Tax Act, 1961 is applicable to a financial year and not to transaction that means if period of 6 months of investment u;/s 54EC spreads to two financial years then investment of more than Rs. 50 Lakh can be made in two such financial years in respect of same transaction.
Circular on taxability of set top boxes under Delhi VATTuesday, December 18, 2012
Commissioner, VAT, Department of Trade and Taxes, Delhi has issued a circular clarifying the taxability of set top boxes under Delhi VAT Act, 2004. It has been mentioned that set top boxes are being supplied by cable operators on lease basis against refundable securities. The circular suggest that such leasing is a deemed sale of goods as transfer of right to use goods. Concealing a receipt in return attracts penalty even if due taxes are depositedSaturday, December 15, 2012
FACTS:
The assessee's services were terminated by the foreign company with which he was employed.
The company Offered him continued employment for a limited tenure, on same terms and remuneration as before.The employer-company paid him an extraordinary compensation of VSD 10 lacs for retention and seaverance of his services.
Penalties under PVAT Act can be adjusted against Excess ITCFriday, December 14, 2012
Section 15 of PVAT Act 2005 deals with the Net Tax Payable by a taxable person. Sub section 1 of Section 15 provides that the output tax under PVAT Act shall be adjusted from the Input Tax Credit for determining Net Tax Payable by a taxable Person. If any excess ITC is still left then it is to be adjusted from the CST liability under CST Act 1956 at the option of the taxable person as per section 15(2) of PVAT Act.
Section 15(3) of PVAT Act provides that the Excess ITC if any left after adjustment of output tax or CST liability u/s 15(1) and 15(2) then such ITC shall be adjusted against any outstanding tax, Penalty or Interest under PVAT Act 2005 or CST Act 1956 as the case may be.
Public notice under PVAT regarding efiling of returns for third quarter of year 2012-13Thursday, December 13, 2012
GOVT OF PUNJAB
EXCISE & TAXATION DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC NOTICE
ATTENTION: DEALERS/ ADVOCATES/ CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS
E-FILING OF QUARTERLY RETURNS FOR THE THIRD QUARTER (Q3)
No disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for short deduction of TDSTuesday, December 11, 2012
Facts: The assessee was engaged in trading of agricultural products. During the course of assessment proceedings, from the tax audit report in Form No. 3CD the Assessing Officer noted that the tax auditor had quantified the amount of Rs. 40,41,233 disallowable under section 40(a)(ia). However, in computation of income the assessee had added back only Rs. 20,16,778. The remaining amount of Rs. 20,24,455 was therefore, disallowed by the Assessing Officer.
Before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer ought to have allowed expenditure on which tax had been deducted and should have disallowed the expenditure on which no tax had been deducted. Alternatively, it was argued that proportionate disallowance of Rs. 15,75,239 should have been made.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
Popular Posts
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
|
