Friday, March 22, 2013

Key amendments useful for CA Final Direct Taxes May 2013



Amendment # 1: Meaning of Capital Asset [Sec 2(14)]:
Capital Asset means ‘Property of any kind…………..’; An Explanation is inserted below section 2(14) (with retrospective effect from April 1, 1962) to clarify that “property” includes any rights in or in relation to an Indian company, including rights of management or control or any other rights whatsoever.

Amendment # 2: CIT to include DIT [Sec 2(16)]:
Section 2(16) has been amended (with retrospective effect from April 1, 1988) to include Director of Income-tax in the definition of Commissioner of Income-tax.

Amendment # 3:  Purchase consideration is to be paid only to outside shareholders: [Amendment in definition of ‘Demerger’. Similar amendment is also made w.r.t ‘Amalgamation also.’] [Sec 2(19AA)]:
In case of demerger, the resulting company should issue shares (in the resulting company), in consideration of demerger, to the shareholders of the demerged company on a proportionate basis. However amendment has excluded the requirements of issue of shares where resulting company itself is a shareholder of the demerged company.  The requirement of issuing shares will still have to be met by the resulting company in case of other shareholders of the demerged company.

Amendment # 4:  Definition of income includes excess amount received over FMV in certain cases:[Sec 2(24) read with Sec 56(2)]:
Any consideration received for issue of share, as exceeds the fair market value of the shares referred to in section 56(2)(viib), shall be treated as “income”.

Amendment # 4A: Amendment to definition of “transfer” [Sec. 2(47)] Transfer includes –
  1. disposing of or parting with an asset or any interest therein, or
  2. creating any interest in any asset in any manner whatsoever.
Amendment # 5: Income through the transfer of the capital asset situated in India [Sec 9(1)(i)]
Sec 9(1)(i) defines deemed income to accrue or arise in India. Explanations 4 and 5 have been inserted in section 9(1)(i) with retrospective effect from April 1, 1962.  The amended provisions provide that –
  1. The expression ‘through’ shall mean and include and shall be deemed to have always meant and included “by means of”, “in consequence of” or “by reason of”.
  2. An asset or a capital asset (being any share or interest in a company or entity registered or incorporated outside India) shall be deemed to be and shall always be deemed to have been situated in India if the share or interest derives, directly or indirectly, its value substantially from the assets located in India.

Amendment # 6: Royalty income deemed to accrue or arise in India [Sec. 9(1)(vi)] [Software is treated as ‘Royalty now’:
Explanation 4 – Explanation  4 has been inserted to clarify that the transfer of all or any rights in respect of any right, property or information includes transfer of all or any right for use or right to use a computer software (including granting of a licence) irrespective of the medium through which such right is transferred.
Explanation 5 – Explanation 5 has been inserted to clarify that the royalty includes consideration in respect of any right, property or information, whether or not –
  1. the possession or control of such right, property or information is with the payer;
  2. such right, property or information is used directly by the payer;
  3. the location of such right, property or information is in India.
Explanation 6 – Explanation 6 has been inserted to clarify that the expression “process” includes transmission by satellite (including up-linking, amplification, conversion for down-linking of any signal), cable, optic fibre or by any other similar technology, whether or not such process is secret.
Amendment # 7: [Premium on Life Insurance Policies shall be up to 10% of ‘sum assured’ to claim exemption w.r.t maturity proceeds [Sec. 10(10D)]:
Under section 10(10D), any sum received under a life insurance policy (including the sum allocated by way of bonus on such policy) is exempt from tax. This exemption is available only if the premium payable for any of the year does not exceed 10% per cent of the actual capital sum assured (applicable for policies issued on or after April, 2012).
Amendment # 8: Income of Prasar Bharati is now exempted [Sec. 10(23BBH)]
Amendment # 9: Certain trusts registered U/S 10(23C) will not be treated as charitable for a previous year if they receive sums exceeding Rs 25 lakhs during the said previous year:  
Section 10(23C)(iv)/(v) has been amended (with retrospective effect from the assessment year 2009-10) to provide that no exempt will be available for a previous year, to a trust or institution (pursuing advancement of any other object of public utility) whose receipts from commercial activities exceed Rs 25,00,000 from AY 2012-13 onwards. [Sec 10(23C)(iv) =  Funds of national importance etc,; Sec 10(23C)(v) = Public Charitable & Religious or Public charitable purposes approved by CCIT / DGIT]. Sec 13 has been suitably amended for this purpose.
Amendment # 10: [Sectoral Restriction is not applicable for Venture Capital Undertakings now] [Earlier they are allowed to invest in only 9 specified sectors] [Sec 10(23FB)]
Sectoral restriction on business of VCU is removed from the Income-tax Act and after the amendment (which is applicable from the assessment year 2013-14) such VCU will be allowed to be governed by conditions imposed by SEBI and RBI.
Amendment # 11: Exemption in respect of Income received by certain foreign companies in Indian currency for import of crude oil [Sec. 10(48)]
Where the approved foreign company receives income in India in Indian currency on account of sale of crude oil, to any person in India, then such income is exempted. Provided further the foreign company should have been approved for this purpose and also it is not engaged in any other activity.
Amendment # 12: Additional depreciation to power sector [See. 32(1)(iia)]
Section 32(1)(iia) has been so amended with effect from the assessment year 2013-14 to enable  an assessee engaged in the business of generation or generation and distribution of power for additional depreciation at the rate of 20 per cent of actual cost of new machinery or plant acquired and installed in a previous year. Also, it may be noted that this additional depreciation is not allowed where the entity opts to claim depreciation on SLM basis with regard to the tangible block of assets.
Amendment # 13: Section 35 (2AB):
The sunset clause has been extended from 31st March 2012 to 31st March 2017. [200% weighted deduction is available to approved in house research facilities till 31st March 2017.]
Amendment # 14: [ICDs / Bee Keeping / Warehousing facility for sugar are also now eligible for deduction U/S 35AD; Also, the deduction in relation to some sectors have been extended to 150% of the qualifying expenditure] [Section 35AD]:
The investment-link incentive under section 35AD has been extended to cover the following new businesses
  1. Setting-up and operating an inland container depot or a container freight station (as notified or approved under the Customs Act.)
  2. Bee-keeping and production of honey and bees wax.
  3. Setting-up and operating a warehousing facility for storage of sugar.
Weighted deduction will be available at the rate of 150% of the qualifying expenditure in the case of following businesses if operation is started on or after April 1, 2012
  1. Setting-up and operating a cold chain facility.
  2. Setting-up and operating a warehousing facility for storage of agricultural produce.
  3. Building and operating, anywhere in India, any hospital with at least 100 beds for patients.
  4. Developing and building a housing project under a scheme for affordable housing framed by the Central Government or a State Government and notified by the Board.
  5. Production of fertilizers in India.
Also, it is clarified that where the assessee builds a two star or above category of hotels and subsequently, while continuing to own the hotel, transfers the operations of the hotel, the assessee shall continue to be eligible for deduction U/S 35AD.

Amendment # 15: Weighted deduction for expenditure incurred on agricultural extension project [Sec. 35CCC]
Any expenditure on notified agricultural extension project, is eligible for weighted deduction of 150 per cent of such expenditure.
Amendment # 16: Weighted deduction for expenditure for skill development [Sec. 35CCD]
A company incurs any expenditure (not being expenditure in the nature of cost of any land or building) on any notified skill development project, then such company can claim a weighted deduction of 150 per cent of such expenditure.

Amendment # 17: Disallowance of business expenditure on account of non-deduction of tax on payment to resident payee [Sec 40(a)(ia)]:
For the purpose of section 40(a)(ia) even if payer has not deducted TDS, it shall be deemed that the payer has deducted and paid the tax on such amount if resident recipient considers such income and files the return by paying tax on the same and furnishes a certificate in prescribed form from CA. In such case payer can claim deduction in respect of expenditure.
Amendment # 18: Transfer price provisions to apply to transactions covered by section 40A (2) if exceed Rs 5 Crores in a year and disallowance is not attracted U/S 40A(2) so long as the transactions were at Arm’s Length Price:
ª      Disallowance under section 40A(2), on account of any expenditure being excessive or unreasonable having regard to the fair market value, shall not be made in respect of a specified domestic transaction (referred to in Section 92BA), if such transaction is at arm’s length price [as defined in section 92F(ii)].
ª      Meaning of related persons under section 40A(2) has been modified to include transactions between companies having the same holding (or controlling) company.  For instance, Y Ltd. owns 20 per cent equity shares capital in X Ltd. Y Ltd. also owns 20 per cent equity share capital in Z Ltd. Any payment by X Ltd. to Z Ltd. will be subject to the scrutiny of section 40A(2) if Z Ltd. carries on a business or profession.  If Z Ltd. does not carry on a business or profession, the amended provisions are not applicable.
Amendment # 19: Threshold limit raised to Rs 1 crore for business assesses and raised to Rs 25 lakhs in the case of professional assesses for tax audit purposes: [Sec 44AB]
Nature of the business
From the assessment year 2013-14
In the case of a business
Rs. 1 crore
In the case of a profession
Rs. 25 lakh
And it is clarified that due date is extended to 30th Nov of the Relevant Assessment Year in all the cases subject to Transfer Pricing Provisions. [i.e Due date is 30th Nov of RAY for corporate and Non-Corporate Assesses.


Amendment # 20: Presumptive basis [Sec. 44AD] is not applicable for ‘Professional Assesses.’
Section 44AD has been amended with retrospective effect from the assessment year 2011-12 to clarify that this presumptive scheme is not applicable to the following persons –
ª      A person carrying on profession as referred to in section 44AA(1);
ª      A person earning income in the nature of the commission or brokerage; or
ª      A person carrying on any agency business.
The following professions are specified by section 44AA(1) – legal, medical, engineering, architectural, accountancy, technical consultancy, or interior decoration or any other notified professions (i.e,  authorized representative, film artist, company secretary and information technology).
Amendment # 21: Purchase consideration to be given only to Outside Share holders in the case of amalgamation. [Similar amendment is made w.r.t demerger also] [Sec 47(vii)]:  
It shall not be necessary for the amalgamated company to issue shares to the shareholders of the amalgamating company to the extent the amalgamated company itself is a shareholder in the amalgamating company.  A similar amendment has been made to the definition of demerger given under section 2(19AA).
Amendment # 22: Cost of acquisition in the case of conversion of firm/sole proprietary concern into company [Sec. 49(1)]
In case of conversion of sole proprietorship/firm into a company which is not regarded as a transfer, the cost of acquisition of asset in the hands of the company would be the same as that in the hands of the sole proprietary concern or the firm, as the case may be.
Amendment # 23: Fair market value to be full value of consideration in certain cases [Sec. 50D]
This section provides that where in the case of a transfer, consideration for the transfer of a capital asset(s) is not determinable, then for purpose of computing capital gains U/S 45, the fair market value of the asset shall be taken to be the full market value of consideration.

Amendment # 24: Capital gains tax from sale of agricultural land by a Hindu undivided family [Sec. 54B]
Benefit of Sec 54B has been extended to HUFs also.
Amendment # 25: Capital gain on transfer of resident house property [Sec. 54GB] and floating a company by an individual / HUF:
Section 54GB gives exemption from long-term capital gains tax to an individual or a HUF on sale of a residential property (house or plot of land) in case of re-investment of sale consideration in the equity of a new start-up SME company in the manufacturing sector which is utilized by the company for the purchase of new plant and machinery. The transfer should take place during April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2017.
Which new asset the taxpayer should acquire? - Before the due date of furnishing of return of income under section 139(1), the assessee will have to utilize the net sale consideration for subscription in equity shares in an “eligible company”.  The “eligible company” should utilize this amount for the purchase of a “new asset” within one year from the date of subscription in equity shares. If, however, the company does not utilize this amount for the purchase of a “new asset” before the due date of furnishing of return of income by the assessee (i.e.,  transferor of residential property), it shall be deposited by the company in capital gain deposit account.  In such a case, exemption would be available on the basis of amount deposited in the deposit account.
How much is exempt?  -
Amount of exemption is as follows (it cannot, however, exceed the amount of capital gain) –
Investment in “new asset” by the eligible company / Net sale consideration x Capital gain
Net sale consideration is sale consideration minus expenditure on transfer incurred by the transferor.
What is “eligible company”?
It means a company which satisfies the following conditions –
  1. It is incorporated on or after April 1 (of the previous year in which residential property is transferred) but on or before the due date of submission of return of income under section 139(1) by the assessee (i.e. transferor of residential property).
  2. It is engaged in the business of manufacture of any article or thing.
  3. The assessee (i.e, transferor of residential property) has more than 50 per cent share capital (or voting right) after subscription in shares by the assessee.
  4. The company qualifies to be a SME (i.e. Small or medium enterprise under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Act, 2006) (i.e., where the investment in plant and machinery is more than Rs. 25 lakh but not more than Rs. 10 crore).
What is new asset? -  It means new plant and machinery but does not include the following –
  1. Any plant or machinery which is used in India or outside India by any person before its installation by the eligible company.
  2. Any plant or machinery which is installed in Office Premises / Residential Accommodation / Guest house.
  3. Any office appliance.
  4. Computers.
  5. Computers software.
  6. Any vehicle.
  7. Any plant or machinery which is allowed 100 per cent deduction (by depreciation or otherwise) in any previous year.



Amendment # 26: Reference to Valuation Officer [Sec. 55A] even in cases where in the opinion of the AO, the FMV claimed by the assessee as on 1st April 1981 is higher vis-à-vis the actual FMV:
where the Assessing Officer is of the opinion that the value taken by the assessee as on April 1, 1981 is higher than the fair market value of the asset as on that date, the Assessing Officer would be enabled to make a reference to the Valuation Officer for determining the fair market value of the property.
Amendment # 27: Any sum or property received by an HUF from its members is treated as received from relative and hence exempted: [Sec. 56(2)(vii)]
As per amended sec 56(2)(vii)  any sum or property received without consideration or inadequate consideration by an HUF from its members will not be chargeable to tax.
Amendment # 28: Share premium in excess of the fair market value to be treated as income [Sec. 56(2)(viib)]
Where the company (not being a company in which the public are substantially interested) receives from a resident person consideration for issue of shares at premium which exceeds fair market value, such excess shall be chargeable U/s 56(2)(viib) under the head “Income from other sources”.
Amendment # 29: Source of funds is to be explained if amount is received as share capital / share premium etc [Sec 68]
As per amended Sec 68, the nature and source of any sum credited, as share capital, share premium, etc., in the books of a closely held company shall be treated as explained only if the source of funds is also explained by the recipient assessee-company in the hands of the resident shareholder. However, the amended provisions will not apply if the shareholder is a well regulated entity, i.e., a Venture Capital Fund, Venture Capital Company registered with the SEBI as referred to in section 10(23FB).

Amendment # 30: Inter unit transfers shall be at Arm’s Length Price [Sec 80A]
A new section 92 BA has been inserted to extend transfer pricing provisions if the aggregate of transactions between related parties in any previous year exceeds 5 cores from A.Y 2013-14 (including the transactions between related parties U/s 10A, 10AA, 10B, 10BA, 80-IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-IC, 80-ID and 80-IE). After the amendment, deduction under the aforesaid sections shall be computed having regard to Arm’s Length Price.

Amendment # 31: [Life Insurance Premium not to exceed 10% of sum assured] [Sec 80C]  
As per amended sec 80C, insurance premium on the life of the tax payer, spouse and any child is restricted to 10 per cent of actual sum assured (earlier it was 20%).




Amendment # 32: Deduction in respect of investment made under any equity saving scheme [Sec. 80CCG]
If the Resident Individual whose gross total income does not exceed Rs. 10 lakh, acquired listed shares of a notified scheme with locking a period of 3 years, then 50 per cent of amount invested in equity shares would get the deduction U/s 80 CCG up to a maximum of 25,000. No other deduction shall be eligible for the same under any other section.
Amendment # 33:
Sec 80-D: Health Insurance Premium: [Payment should be made in any mode other than cash. However, health check up can be effected through cash]:
Deduction available to Individual or HUF
ª      In the case of individuals:
                                i.            Health Insurance policies;
                              ii.            Contributions made to Central Government Health Schemes;
                            iii.            Preventive Health Check up
ª      In the case of HUFs:
Health Insurance Policies
Individual can take policies on family members i.e self/spouse/dependent children / parents; HUF can take policy on any member of the family. Contributions to health insurance plans of GIC / IRDA / Central Govt Health Scheme are eligible for deduction.
General deduction is Rs.15,000 in respect of self / spouse / dependent children [Rs.20,000 if any member is a senior citizen] and additional deduction of Rs.15,000 if the same is in respect of parents [Rs 20,000 if parent is a senior citizen]. While counting these limits, where the sum is paid on account of preventive health check up, the deduction for such amount is for a maximum of Rs 5,000/-.  Senior Citizen means an Individual resident in India who is of the age 60 years or more at any time during the relevant previous year.
Qualifying age for senior citizens has been reduced from 65 years to 60 years for the purpose of section 80D (and also for the purpose of section 80DDB and 197A).
Amendment # 34: [Eligible Age of Senior citizens reduced to 60 years from the existing age of 65 Years] [Sec 80DDB]:
From the assessment year 2013-14, the qualifying age for senior citizens has been reduced from 65 years to 60 years for the purpose of section 80DDB (and also for the purpose of section 80D and 197A). 
Amendment # 35: 80G & 80GGA: [Sums exceeding Rs 10,000/- cannot be paid in cash]
Amended Sections 80G and 80GGA specify  that any payment exceeding Rs. 10,000 shall only be allowed as a deduction if such sum is paid by any mode other than cash.

Amendment #36: [Power Sectors can commence operations by 31st March 2013][Sec 80-IA]
Amendment #37: Deduction is respect of interest on deposits in savings account up to Rs 10,000/- [See. 80 TTA]
An individual or a HUF receives any interest on deposits from a Savings Bank account with bank or co-operative society, post office, then deduction up to Rs. 10,000 in aggregate is allowable U/s 80 TTA. This is in addition to exemption U/s 10(15)(i) [up to Rs. 3,500 (in an individual account) and Rs. 7,000 (in a joint account).]
Amendment # 38: Section 90 and 90A
ª      [Notification issued by the Central Government assigning a meaning to term used in DTAA (Sec 90 cases) / Agreement (Sec 90A cases) to have effect from the date when the DTAA came into force]
ª      TRC (Tax Residence Certificate) is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for claiming the benefits of DTAA (Sec 90 cases) or the agreement (Sec 90A cases.)
ª      If General Anti Avoidance Rules (GAAR) are invoked, then the benefits of (DTAA) Sec 90 and Sec 90A are not available.

Amendment # 39: Section 92 [Specified Domestic Transactions are also covered under the scope of TP provisions now]
Section 92 has been amended so as to provide that any allowance for an expenditure or interest or allocation of any cost or expense or any income in relation to the specified domestic transaction shall be computed having regard to the arm’s length price. 
Amendment # 40: [Sec 92B]
Definition of international transaction [Sec 92B] has been amended to cover within its ambit certain transactions like business restructuring etc, even though they do not have any bearing on profits or losses of current year or impact on profit and loss is not determinable under normal computational provisions. 
Amendment # 41: Introduction of Sec 92BA [Specified Domestic Transactions]
Newly inserted sec 92BA provides meaning of “specified domestic transaction” with reference to which income is computed U/S 92 having regard to arm’s length price. Accordingly if the aggregate of the below transactions entered into by the assesse in a previous year exceeds Rs. 5 Crore, then TP provisions are applicable even in such cases.
a. Any expenditure in respect of which payment has been made or is to be made to a person referred to in section 40A(2)(b);
b. Any transaction referred to in section 80A;
c. Any transfer of goods or services referred to in section 80-IA (8);
d. Any business transacted between the assessee and other person as referred to in section 80-IA (10);
e. Any transaction, referred to in any other section under Chapter VI-A or section10AA, to which provisions of section 80-IA (8) / (10) are applicable; or
f. Any other transaction as may be prescribed.

Amendment # 42: Determination of arm’s length price (ALP) [Sec. 92C] [Maximum Permissible deviation can be up to 3%]
Section 92C(2) have been amended, so as to provide an upper ceiling of 3 per cent in respect of the Central Government’s power  to notify the tolerance range for determination of arms length price.
Amendment # 43: Examination by the Transfer Pricing Officer of International transactions not reported by the Assessee [Sec 92CA]
section 92CA has been amended (with retrospective effect from June 1, 2002) to empower TPO to determine ALP of an international transaction noticed by him in the course of proceedings before him, even if the said transaction was not referred to him by the Assessing Officer, provided that such international transaction was not reported by the taxpayer as per the requirement cast upon him under section 92E.  However, this retrospective amendment will not empower the Assessing Officer either to assess or reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year, proceedings for which have been completed before July 1, 2012.
Amendment # 44: Advance pricing agreement (APA) [Sec. 92CC and 92CD]:
APA provisions have been introduced by virtue of which the assessee can determine in advance the Arm’s Length Transfer Price in consultation with the CBDT for the proposed transactions. This agreement, once entered, is having effect up to a period not exceeding 5 Years.  
Amendment # 45: General anti-avoidance rules (GAAR) [Sec. 95 to 102] [These provisions are proposed to be applicable from 1st April 2014. Later on, the same has been extended to 1st April 2016.]
Once these provisions are introduced, the revenue has a power to see the substance over the form and can disregard the tax structure entered into by the assessee.
The revenue authorities check whether the arrangement creates ‘Rights and Obligations to parties’ which are not normally not created between parties dealing at Arm’s Length; Whether it results in misuse of tax laws; Whether the transaction lacks commercial substance or deemed to lack commercial substance; etc,. and whether the transactions are carried out in a manner, which is not normally employed for bonafide purposes. If the revenue authorities come to a conclusion that these arrangements are not permissible keeping in view the above yardsticks, then they may disregard the legal form and can look at the substance of the transactions.
Amendment # 46:  [The tax rate has been increased from 10% to 15%] [Sec 111A]
The proviso section 111A has now been amended (with retrospective effect from the assessment year 2009-10) to increase the tax rate to 15 per cent.

Amendment # 47: Unlisted Securities eligible for 10% tax rate in certain cases:
[Now concessional tax rate of 10% is applicable in the cases of transfer of unlisted securities transferred by a non-resident / foreign company.] Once this tax rate is applicable, indexation benefit is not applicable.
Amendment # 48: Interest covered by sec 194LC taxable at 5%. [Sec 115A]
Any interest received by a non-resident/foreign company from a specified company (i.e.,  an Indian company) in respect of money borrowed during July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2015 shall be taxable at the rate of 5 per cent (+SC+EC+SHEC). Applicable if such interest covered by Sec 194LC.
Amendment # 49: Taxation of a non-resident entertainer, sports person [Sec. 115BBA]
Tax rate increased to 20%. Scope now includes non-Indian citizen being non-resident entertainer (such as theatre, radio or television artists and musicians) from performance in India.
Amendment # 50: Tax on dividends from foreign companies [Sec. 115BBD]
Gross dividends received by an Indian company from a specified foreign company taxable at the rate of 15% (+SC+EC+SHEC), extended to AY 2013-14.
Amendment # 51: Tax on Income referred to in section 68 to 69D [Sec. 115BBE]
Undisclosed income referred to in section 68 to 69D shall be taxable at the rate of 30 per cent (+SC+EC+SHEC).
Amendment # 52: Minimum alternate tax [Sec. 115JB] :
ª      MAT provisions will not be applicable to life insurance business of a company.
ª      Book profit as specified U/s 115JB, in the case of any insurance or banking company or any company engaged in the generation or supply of electricity, shall be calculated on the basis of profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the provisions of their regulatory Acts.
ª      Book profit shall be increased by the amount standing in the revaluation reserve in relation to the revalued asset which has been retired or disposed, if the same is not credited to the profit and loss account
Amendment # 53: Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) on all persons other than companies [Sec. 115JC to 115JF]
Discussed already in the portion ‘Certain Important tax rates’.




Amendment # 54: Special provisions relating to conversion of Indian branch of a foreign bank into a subsidiary Indian company [Sec. 115JG]

Capital Gain on conversion of an Indian branch of a foreign bank into an Indian subsidiary company in accordance with scheme framed by RBI shall not be chargeable tax. If any default is committed later, the benefit of exemption will be taken back by recomputing of income U/S 154(7) within 4 years.

Section 115JG has been inserted with effect from the assessment year 2013-14. Special provisions are provided under this section –
a. Where a foreign company is engaged in the business of banking in India through its branch situated in India; and
b. Such branch is converted into a subsidiary Indian company.
Then capital gains on conversion is exempted if the scheme is in accordance with guidelines framed by RBI in this regard.
Amendment # 55: Removal of the cascading effect of dividend distribution tax (DDT) [Sec. 115-O] [Relief from DDT extended to multi level structures also.]
Any company receives, during the year, any dividend from any subsidiary and such subsidiary has paid DDT as payable on such dividend, then dividend distributed by the holding company in the same year, to that extent, shall not be subject to DDT under section 115-O. Applicable even if the holding company is subsidiary of another company. However, the same amount of dividend shall not taken into account for reduction more than once.

Amendment # 56: Amendment to section 115U [Income from VCF / VCC to be taxable on accrual basis]
Income accruing to Venture Capital Fund (VCF) or Venture Capital Company (VCC) shall be taxable in the hands of investor on accrual basis with no deferral.
Amendment # 57: Daily tonnage income of shipping company [Sec. 115VG]
The rates of daily tonnage income specified under section 115VG have been revised with effect from the assessment year 2013-14 as follows –
Qualifying ship having net tonnage
Amount of daily tonnage income (from assessment year 2013-14)
Up to 1,000
Rs. 70 for each 100 tons
Exceeding 1,000 but not more than 10,000
Rs. 700 plus Rs. 53 for each 100 tons exceeding 1,000 tons
Exceeding 10,000 but not more than 25,000
Rs. 5,470 plus Rs. 42 for each 100 tons exceeding 10,000 tons
Exceeding 25,000
Rs. 11,770 plus Rs. 29 for each 100 tons exceeding 25,000 tons

Amendment # 58: [Section 139]:
Mandatory filing of return of income by resident in India having any asset located outside India or signing authority in any account located outside India.
Due date for submission of return of income in case of a person (corporate or otherwise) having international transactions is Nov 30 of the Relevant Assessment Year.

Amendment # 59:  [Section 140A]:
While computing self-assessment tax AMT credit U/s 115JD will also be taken into account.

Amendment # 60:  [Section 143]:
Where a scrutiny notice has been issued to the assessee U/s 143(2), processing of a return filed U/s 143(1) shall not be necessary.

Amendment # 61:  [Section 144C]:
ª      [Powers of DRP now extended to new issues arising during the course of proceedings before it but which have not been raised in the draft assessment order.]
ª      DRP provisions not applicable in case GAAR is invoked; 
Amendment # 61: [Notice can be issued up to 16 years in certain cases] [Section 147]
4 years limit for issue of notice U/S 148 shall not be applicable in respect of any income in relation to any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment for any assessment year. In such cases, notice can be issued up to 16 years from the end of the Relevant Assessment Year.
Scope of ‘Income Deemed to have Escaped Assessment’ has been extended to cover the following also.
ª      Cases where the assessee has failed to furnish a report in respect of any international transaction which he was so required under section 92E;
ª      Cases where a person in found to have any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India.
Amendment # 62: Other related amendments to Sec 149
Where the income in relation to any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India, chargeable to tax, has escaped assessment, notice u/s 148 can be issued up to 16 years from the end of the Relevant Assessment Year.
In case of a person treated as the agent of a non-resident, notice U/S 148 can be issued up to 6 years (earlier it was 2 years) from the end of the RAY.




Amendment # 63: [Sec 153]
The existing period and the new extended period for exemption of pending proceedings and subsequent proceedings under these provisions are given below-
Proceedings under section
Amended time limit
143
Increased from 21 months to 24 months from the end of the AY.
143 and 92 CA
Increased from 33 months to 36 months from the end of the AY.
148
Increased from 9 months to 12 months from the end of the year in which notice is served.
148 and 92CA
Increased from 21 months to 24 months from the end of the year in which notice is served.
250 or 254 or 263
Increased from 9 months to 12 months from the end of the financial year in which order is received.
250 or 254 or 263 and 92CA
Increased from 21 months to 24 months from the end of the financial year in which order is received.

Amendment # 64: Notification of a class of search cases where compulsory reopening of past six years is not required [Sec. 153A and 153C]
153A and 153C have been amended to empower the Central Government to notify cases (or class of cases) in which case AO shall not issue notice for initiation of proceedings for the preceding 6 assessment years.  This would result in initiating assessment proceedings only for the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search or requisition has been made.
Amendment # 65: Extension of Time limit by 3 months [Sec 153B]
Time limit for completion of assessment U/S 153A has been increased from 21 months to 24 months from the end of the financial year in which last of the authorizations for search U/S 132 was executed or requisition U/S 132A was made. Where the matter has been referred to TPO, the time limit is increased from 33 months to 36 months from the end of the financial year in which last of search authorizations U/S 132 was executed or requisition U/S 132A was made.
Amendment # 66: Rectification of intimation received after processing of TDS statement [Sec. 154]
Sec 200A provides for processing of TDS statements. After processing of TDS statements, an intimation is generated specifying the amount payable or refundable. Such intimation generated after processing of TDS statement shall be –
  1. Subject to rectification under section 154;
  2. Appealable under section 246A; and
  3. Deemed as notice of demand under section 156.
Amendment # 67: TDS from interest on debentures [Sec. 193] [No TDS on interest paid to Individual / HUF if the sums does not exceed Rs 5,000/- and paid through A/C Payee Cheque]
No TDS on any interest payable to an individual or a HUF, who is resident in India, on any debentures issued by a company in which the public are substantially interested, if –
a)      The amount of interest or, as the case may be, the aggregate amount of such interest paid or likely to be paid on such debenture during the financial year by the company to such individual or HUF does not exceed Rs 5,000; and
b)      Such interest is paid by the company by an account payee cheque.
Amendment # 68: TDS on payments to non-resident sport persons, sport associations or entertainer [Sec. 194E] [Rate hiked to 20% and Scope extended to Entertainers]
Rate has been increased to 20%. The scope is enhanced to cover payment/credit to a Non-Resident Entertainer (such as theater, radio or television artists and musicians) being non-Indian citizen from performance in India.
Amendment # 69: TDS on remuneration to a director [Sec. 194J]
Any remuneration or fees or commission by whatever name called, other than those on which tax is deductible U/S192, to a director of a company is liable for TDS @ 10%. Threshold limit of Rs  30,000/- is not available to these category of payments.
Amendment # 70: Amendment to section 194LA
Threshold limit in the case of compensation on acquisition of certain immovable property has been increased from 1,00,000 to Rs 2,00,000.
Amendment # 71: Tax deduction by an Indian specified company from interest to a non-resident/foreign company [Sec. 194LC]
Specified Company (i.e, an Indian company) is responsible for tax deduction U/S 194LC in respect of interest paid or payable to a non-resident / foreign company.  This section is applicable if interest is paid or payable at approved rate.  Interest should pertain to money borrowed (during July 1, 2012 June 30, 2015) in foreign currency from a source outside India –
a)      Under a loan agreement; or
b)      By way of issue of long-term infrastructure bonds,
as approved by the Central Government.
Tax is deductible at the rate of 5 per cent of interest. 


Amendment # 72: Amendment to section 195 [Where payer is non-resident, he is also liable to comply with TDS provisions]
Tax will be deductible even if non-resident deductor does not have any place of business, residence, business connection (or any other presence) in India.
Sec 195(7) has been introduced which provides that the Board may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify a class of persons or cases, where the person responsible for paying to a non-resident/foreign company, any sum (whether or not chargeable under the provisions of the Act), shall make an application to the Assessing Officer to determine, by general or special order, the appropriate proportion of sum chargeable to tax in India.  Upon such determination, tax shall be deducted under section 195 on that proportion of the sum which is so chargeable.
Amendment # 73: Amendment to section197A
Section 197A has been amended with effect from July 1, 2012 as follows –
ª      Age of senior citizen - The qualifying age for senior citizens has been reduced form 65 years to 60 years for the purpose of section 197A (and also for the purpose of section 80D and 80DDB). [i.e Therefore, a resident citizen of 60 years or more (i.e Resident Senior Citizens) can submit form 15H for receiving certain sums without TDS.]
ª      No TDS from specified payment to notified institutions / associations - Sub-section (1F) has been inserted to provide that tax will not be deducted at source from a specified payment to a notified institution, association or body or class of institutions, associations or bodies.
Amendment # 74: Amendment to section 201 [Resident Payer is not treated as ‘Assessee in Default’ in certain cases]
This section is so amended to provide that the payer who fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax on the payment made to a resident payee shall not be deemed to be an assessee - in-default in respect of such tax, if the following conditions are satisfied –
ª      The resident recipient has furnished his return of income under section 139;
ª      The resident recipient has taken into account the above income in such return of income;
ª      The resident recipient has paid the tax due on the income declared in such return of income, and
ª      The payer furnishes a certificate to this effect from a chartered accountant in a prescribed form. [Form No 26A vide Rule No 31ACB is notified for this purpose.] [IT (Eleventh Amendment Rules, 2012]

Amendment # 75: Interest for non-deduction U/s 201(1A):
The new provision lays down that where the payer fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax on the payment made to a resident and the prescribed conditions are satisfied, the interest U/s 201(1A) (i) shall be payable from the date on which such tax was deductible to the date of furnishing the return of income by such resident payee.

Amendment # 76: “Person responsible for paying” in case of payment by Central Government or Government of a State [Sec. 204] [Amendment in relation to TDS provisions]
In the case of payment made by Central Government or by a State Government, Drawing and Disbursing Officer or any other person (by whatever name called) responsible for making payment shall be the “person responsible for paying.”
Amendment # 77: Amendments relating to TCS [206C]
TCS on Minerals
TCS at 1% to be collected by seller from buyer on Minerals, being coal or lignite or iron ore [W.E.F 1st July 2012]
TCS on sale of jewellery / bullion
With effect from July 1, 2012, sale of bullion/jewellery will be subject to TCS provisions, if the following conditions are satisfied –
  1. Sale consideration of bullion (excluding any coin/article weighing 10 grams or less) exceeds Rs. 2,00,000 or sale consideration of jewellery exceeds Rs. 5,00,000.
  2. Out of sale consideration any amount is received in cash.
If the above conditions are satisfied, the seller will collect tax at the rate of 1 % of sale consideration. Tax will be collected at the time of receipt of any amount in cash.  This rule will be applicable irrespective of the fact whether the buyer is a manufacturer, trader or the purchase is for personal use. 
Interest under section 206C(7) for non-collection of tax ­ -
In case of default in collecting tax U/S 206C interest shall be payable from the date on which such tax was collectible to the date of furnishing of return of income of buyer/lessee/licensee.
Goods utilized for power generation – Not subject to tax collection [Sec. 206C(1A)]  -
For goods utilized for power generation TCS is not applicable if declaration (in Form 27C) is given to seller.
Amendment # 78: Exemption for senior citizens from payment of advance tax [Sec. 207]
A resident individual being senior citizen and who does not derived any income chargeable under the head Business or Profession need not pay any advance tax.
Amendment # 79: Amendment to section 209
Hitherto, TDS /TCS receivable is also eligible for deduction while estimating the advance tax liability. This section is so amended as to provide that TDS / TCS actually deducted or collected only shall be eligible for reduction while estimating the advance tax liability.
Amendment # 80: Amendment to section 220
Section  220 has been amended (with effect from July 1, 2012) to provide that when interest is charged under section 201(1A) on the amount specified in the intimation issued under section 200A(1), then no interest will be charged for the same amount for the same period under section 220(2).
Amendment # 81: Amendment to section 234A, 234B and 234C
AMT credit u/s 115JD would be considered at the time of calculating interest u/s 234A, B, C.
Amendment # 82: Charging of interest on recovery of refund granted earlier
Section 234D was inserted by the Finance Act, 2003 with effect from June 1, 2003. Under this section interest is recovered on refund granted earlier.
Where any refund has been granted to the assessee under section 143(1) and, subsequently, or regular assessment, no refund (or lesser amount of refund) is found due to the assessee, then the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of one-half per cent on the excess amount so refunded for the period starting from the date of refund to the date of such regular assessment.
It is clarified that this provision is applicable to any proceeding which is completed on or after June 1, 2003, irrespective of the assessment year to which it pertains.
Amendment # 83:
Fee for delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS quarterly statement [Sec 200(3); Sec 206C(3)]; ‘Fees” is attracted @ Rs 200/- per day of default. [Sec 234E]
If a person fails to deliver *(or cause to be delivered) a quarterly TDS/TCS return within the time prescribed in section 200(3) or the proviso to section 206C(3), he shall be liable to pay, by way of fee, a sum of Rs. 200 for everyday during which the failure continues. This fees will be in addition to other consequences under the Act. The fees shall not exceed TDS/TCS amount. It will not be possible to submit belated quarterly TDS/TCS returns without payment of fees under section 234E.
Amendment # 84:
Related person for the purpose of making an application before Settlement Commissioner [Sec. 245C]
Under the amended provisions a person shall be deemed to have a substantial interest in a business or profession if such person is a beneficial owner of not less than 20 per cent of shares or of 20% in profits on the date of search. [Earlier the words used were ‘At any time during the previous year’. Now, the same had been substituted with ‘on the date of search’.]

Amendment # 85: AAR:
The minimum fees an application is raised from Rs 2,500/- to Rs 10,000/-. In deserving cases, the revenue can collect even beyond Rs 10,000/- fees before filing an application.
Advance Ruling can be sought by any ‘Resident / Non-Resident’ to determine whether an arrangement which is proposed to be undertaken by him / it, is an impermissible agreement. [i.e Whether the arrangement will invite GAAR provisions.]
Amendment # 86: Amendment to section 246A [Appeals to CIT(A)]
[Processing of E-TDS returns: This can be appealed with the CIT(A);
DRP’s orders & GAAR orders-No appeal with CIT(A) but the appeal lies with the ITAT;
On the other hand, APA can be challenged with the CIT(A);
Penalty during the course of search order passed U/S 271AAB (New penalty which ranges from 10% to 90% of undisclosed income) can be challenged with the CIT(A)]
Amendment # 87: Amendment to section 253 and 254
Sec 253(1)(d):
Assessees aggrieved by the orders of AO U/S 153A or U/S 153C in pursuance of directions of the DRP can appeal to the ITAT. Similarly, an order passed U/S 154 in respect of such order can also be appealed to the ITAT. [Consequently Sec 246A has been amended that these search orders passed in pursuance of directions of DRP cannot be appealed with the CIT]
Sec 253(1)(e): [GAAR orders can be appealed to the ITAT. These orders cannot be appealed with CIT(A).]
Sec 253(2A):
As per the existing provisions, the department cannot file an appeal against orders passed by DRP. Now the department can also file an appeal to ITAT against the orders of DRP.  
The Assessing Officer can also file an appeal before the ITAT against an order passed in pursuance of directions of the DRP. This appeal can be filed within 60 days of the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is passed by the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the directions of DRP. Cross objections can be filed within 30 days.
Amendment # 88: Amendment to section 271(1)(c):
In addition to international transaction, Specified domestic transaction is also included for concealment penalty.


Amendment # 89:
Penalty for failure to keep and maintain information and document pertaining to international/certain domestic transactions [Sec.271AA]
Section 271AA has been substituted by a new section with effect from July 1, 2012. It provides levy of a penalty at the rate of 2 per cent of the value of the international transaction, if the taxpayer –
  1. fails to maintain prescribed documents or information;
  2. fails to report any international transaction which is required to be reported; or
  3. maintains or furnishes any incorrect information or documents.
This penalty would be in addition to penalties under section 271BA and 271G.
Provisions of section 271AA, 271BA and 271G will also be applicable to “specified domestic transactions” with effect from April 1, 2013.

Amendment # 90: Penalty where search has been initiated on or after July 1, 2012 [Sec. 271AAB]
Up to 1st July 2012, penalty U/S 271AAA will be levied @ 10% of undisclosed income during the course of search w.r.t ‘Specified Previous Year.’ After that date, penalty shall be levied U/S 271AAB which reads as under.
There is some “undisclosed income” and it pertains to a “specified previous year”.  In such a case, the assessee shall pay a penalty under section 271AAB in addition to tax as follows –
Diff penalties ranging from 10% of undisclosed income to 90% of undisclosed income can be levied.
Penalty @ 10% undisclosed income: If the assessee admits undisclosed income, substantiates the same and pays the tax along with interest.
Penalty @ 20% undisclosed income: If the assessee does not admit undisclosed income but pays tax and int;
Penalty @ 30% to 90% undisclosed income: In any other case. [i.e He does not admit as well as he has not paid tax+ int]
Amendment # 91: [Section 271G]
Penalty of 2% of value of international transaction has been extended to Specified Domestic Transactions also in cases where there is a failure to furnish information or documents required U/S 92D.
Amendment # 92: Penalty for failure to furnish quarterly TDS/TCS returns [Sec. 271H]
Following cases are covered under this section.
Case 1:  If a person fails to submit quarterly TDS/TCS return on or before the due date.
Case 2:  If a person furnishes incorrect information in these quarterly returns.
If there is reasonable for the above said failure then these penalties will not be levied. If these are levied, one can approach the CIT U/S 273A and get these waived after complying with necessary conditions.
Special relaxation for Case # 1: No penalty shall be levied for delay in furnishing of TDS/TCS quarterly return if such return is submitted within one year of the due date after payment of tax deducted/collected along with applicable interest and fee.
Penalty leviable under this section:
A person has to pay a penalty of not less than Rs. 10,000.  It may be extended to Rs. 1,00,000.  Penalty U/s 271H will be in addition to fees payable U/s 234E.
Amendment # 93:
[Sec 280A, 280B, 280C and 280D]: Expediting prosecution proceedings under the Act [Special Courts can try IT cases and Cr.Pc cases simultaneously]
To strengthen the prosecution mechanism, new sections 280A, 280B, 280C and 280D have been inserted with effect from July 1, 2012.
ª      Under these sections the Central Government may constitute Special Courts for trial of offences punishable under the Act. 
ª      While trying an offence under the Act, a Special Court shall also try an offence with which the accused may, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, be charged at the same trial.
ª      Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Special Court shall try an offence under the Act punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 2 years or with fine or with both as a summons case.
Amendment # 94:
Amendment to the existing sections w.r.t offences and prosecutions:
The provisions of section 276C, 276CC, 277, 277A and section 278 provide that in a case where the amount of tax, penalty or interest which would have been evaded by a person exceeds Rs. 1 lakh, he shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 6 months but which may extend to 7 years and with fine.  In case the amount which would have been evaded by a person does not exceed Rs. 1 lakh, he shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 3 months but which may extend to 3 years and with fine.
The threshold of Rs. 1 lakh (which was introduced in 1976) has been increased to Rs. 25 lakhs.  Summons trials apply to offences where the minimum term of imprisonment does not exceed 2 years. It is, therefore, provided that where the amount which would have been evaded does not exceed Rs. 25 lakh, the person shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 3 months but which may extend to 2 years and with fine.  These amendments will take effect from the July 1, 2012.


Amendment # 95:

Authorization or requisition and subsequent assessment in search cases [Sec. 292CC] [Mere mention of more than one person need not be referring to AOP, and assessment can be done on each such person individually.]
A new section 292CC has been inserted with retrospective effect from April 1, 1976.  It provides that –
a.        It shall not be necessary to issue an authorization under section 132 or make a requisition under section 132A separately in the name of each person.
b.        Where an authorization under section 132 has been issued or a requisition under section 132A has been made mentioning therein the name of more than one person, the mention of such names of more than one person on such authorization or requisition shall not be deemed to construe that it was issued in the name of an association of persons or body of individuals consisting of such person.
c.         Notwithstanding that an authorization under section 132 has been issued or a requisition under section 132A has been made mentioning therein the name of more than one person, the assessment or reassessment shall be made separately in the name of the each of the persons mentioned in such authorization or requisition.
Amendment # 96: Validation of demand, etc., under the Income-tax Act in certain cases
Section 119 of the Finance Bill, 2012 seeks to provide for validation of demand, etc., under Income-tax Act in certain cases in respect of income accruing or arising through or from the transfer of a capital asset situated in India in consequence of transfer of a share (or shares) in a company incorporated outside India or in consequence of any agreement (or otherwise) outside India.
Amendment # 97: Amendments to Wealth-tax Act
Exemption of residential house allotted to employees by a company:
It does not include a residential house allotted by a company to an employee or an officer or a whole Time Director, if the gross annual salary of such an employee / officer, etc, is less than Rs 10 lakhs (earlier 5 lakhs).

Reassessment in relation to any asset located outside India:
The time-limit been increased to 16 years.

Cases where net wealth chargeable to tax has escaped assessment:
Explanation to section 17(1A) gives a deeming list where net wealth chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.  Where a person is found to have any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India, it shall be deemed to be a case where net wealth chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. This amended version will be applicable with effect from July 1, 2012.

Extension of time for completion of assessment and reassessments [Sec. 17A]
Time limit for completion of assessments and reassessments shall, respectively, be increased by 3 months.
End of Amendments Vide Finance Act, 2012
Exemption from wealth tax to Reserve Bank of India (RBI): RBI will not be chargeable to wealth-tax.

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Examination batch for DT (CA Final) - May 2013 Attempt

Dear students,

Please be informed that the next batch for Direct Taxes (CA Final) for May 2013/Nov 2013 attempt will be starting from 18th Feb 2013 (Monday) onwards.

Timings:
6.00 AM to 9.00AM daily

Duration:
From 18th Feb 2013 to 10th April 2013.

Venue:
Room No # 14; 1st Floor;
Hindi Mahavidyalaya;
Opp: Vidyanagar Petrol Bunk;
Vidyanagar; O.U Road.
Hyderabad
For enquiries : Plz Contact: 9963 250 500

With Best Wishes,

Rp sir

 

3rd Edition of My Book (May 2013 and Nov 2013 CA Final Attempt)

Hi,

Thank you for patronizing my book. I am pleased to inform that the 3rd edition of my book "A Comprehensive Approach to Direct Tax Laws" AY 2013-14 which is relevant for CA Final students appearing in May 2013 / Nov 2013 is going to hit the market on 12th Feb 2013.

4th Module (Covering about 40 marks of your CA Final syllabus) will be released by 12th Feb 2013 and the remaining modules will be released by 20th Feb 2013.

As there are more amendments (numbering around 113), i suggest students to focus more on amendements which will be given in the summary module of my book. For the benefit of others who are following other books, they can download the amendments freely from blog after the book has been released into the market. Or they can purchase the summary module separately.

Apart from the amendments, all important case laws up to 15th March 2013 will be posted separately in my blog duirng the last week of March 2013.

If any of you faces any difficulty in downloading from my blog, please shoot an email to my email: askrpsir@gmail.com.

Best Wishes,

Rp sir
+91-9963 250 500




 

Thursday, November 1, 2012

Dear students,

Please note that the next batch for Direct and Indirect Taxes for CA Final (May 2013) will be starting from 15th Nov 2012 (Morning Hours) onwards at Hindimahavidyalaya - Nallakunta.

Time Table:

Subject
Days
Timings
Direct Taxes – CA Final
Monday to Thursday
6.00 AM to 9.00 AM
Indirect Taxes – CA Final
Friday to Sunday
6.00 AM to 9.00 AM

Note: With prior intimation, extra classes will be taken on Sundays and holidays.
Venue:
Class Room No # 14;
First Floor; Hindi Mahavidyalaya;
Nallakunta; Opp: Vidyanagar Petrol Bunk;
Adjacent to: Durga Bhai Deshmukh Hospital;
O.U.Road; Hyderabad - 500 044;

For admissions please contact:
98495-79413;
9963 250 500

With best wishes
Rp


 

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Imp case laws for CA Final - Direct Taxes - Nov 2012


Case Law # 1: Case law on assessment proceedings [743 page Aug 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]

The AO needs to record reasons before issuance of notice U/S 148 for the purpose of Re-Assessment or Income escaping assessment U/S 147. Thus, framing of reasons after issue of notice U/S 148 is as bad as a Challan before jumping a red light.

[Dadanbai B.Bachani Vs ITO] [2012] [22 Taxmann.com 308] [Mumbai – Trib]

Case Law # 2: Case law on Capital Gains [773 page Aug 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]

For the purpose of Sec 54, the capital gains can be invested before the due date for filing belated return. Also, where advance is given to a builder towards purchase of a flat, period of 3 years is available from the date of transfer for investing in the new flat as it will be treated as construction of a flat rather than purchase of a flat.

[Kishore H.Galaiya Vs ITO] [2012] [24 Taxmann.com 11] [Mumbai – Trib]; [CIT Vs Jagriti Aggarwal (2011) (15 Taxmann.com 146)] [Punjab and Haryana H.C]

Case Law # 3: Case law on Sec 14A [752page Aug 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]

Generally, expenditure relating to exempt income is not allowed as per the provisions of Sec 14A.

However, where the shares were bought by the assessee as stock in trade, and the dividend income arose to the assessee on account of unsold shares, brokerage paid at the time of purchase of the aforesaid shares cannot be disallowed as the investment was not made for earning dividends. [CCI Ltd Vs JCIT] [2012] [20 Taxmann.com 196]

Case Law # 4: Case law on AAR [733 page Aug 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT] [157 Page Sep 16th to 30th, 2012 CPT]

Authority for Advance Rulings will not entertain an application if there is any pending proceeding.

In the recent case of “Netapp B.V. Vs AAR” [2012] [24 Taxmann.com] [174] [Delhi], it was held that once the assessee files return of income, the AAR loses its jurisdiction as it will be treated as a pending proceeding.

Case law # 5: Case law on bad debts in the case of banks [656 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]

The Apex Court clarified the scope of Sec 36(1)(vii) and Sec 36(1)(viia) which deals with bad debts and provision for bad debts respectively.

How to write off bad debts relating to rural advances?

Bad debts relating to rural advances needs to be first adjusted against the provision for bad debts account. There after the balance bad debts are to be written off to profit and loss account.

How to write off bad debts relating to urban advances?

In this case, the banks can write off directly the bad debts relating to urban advances to the profit and loss account as urban advances are not controlled by the provisions of Sec 36(1)(viia).

[Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd Vs CIT] [2012] [18 Taxmann.com 282] [Supreme Court]

Case law # 6: Case law on Charitable Trusts [670 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]

The trusts registered U/S 12A needs to apply 85% of their income towards charitable purpose so as to get the benefit of Sec 11.

i.e In layman’s terms, the trust needs to apply 85% of their income. Now, can such trust source foreign goods and services and claim that it applied its income towards charitable purposes? The Delhi High Court says “No”. Thus, a trust registered U/S 12A cannot source foreign goods and services to claim the benefit of Sec 11. [DIT (Exemptions) Vs National Association of Software and Services Companies] [2012] [21Taxmann.com 213]

Case law # 7: Case law on ESOPs [684 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

The assessee company passed a resolution to issue equity shares free of cost to its employees as sweat equity. Shares were to be issued with lock in period of five years. No allotment is done during the relevant previous year.

However, the fair value of shares allotted was debited to “Employee Benefits Account” [P&L item] with corresponding credit to “Shares Outstanding Account” [B/S item].  The AO denied the same as it amounted to contingent liability.

The Chandigarh Tribunal held that the same was not a contingent liability merely because there was a lock in period of five years under which if any employee left before the expiry of five years, the shares which were allotted to him would vest with the company. Hence, the same is allowed as an expense.

[Addl CIT Vs Spray Engineering Devices Ltd] [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 267] [Chattisgarh – Trib]

Similar ruling was given by the Madras High Court in the case of “CIT Vs PVP Ventures Ltd” [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 286] where it held that ESOP expenses shall be allowed if the scheme is recognized in compliance with SEBI norms.

Readers may please note that the facts of “Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd Vs ACIT” [2010] [39 SOT 17] [Delhi] were different. In that case as the liability was contingent in nature, the same was disallowed.

 

 

 

Case law # 8: Case law on 54F [687 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

The assessee owned a property jointly along with her husband. The assessee entered into a developing agreement for the joint development of 8 apartments in another property owned by the assessee. As per the terms of the development agreement, she transferred the plot of land to the builder and received in exchange 4 residential apartments and Rs 10 lakhs. She claimed Sec 54F exemption as she sold plot of land and acquired residential house. The department denied the exemption as she owned more than one house as on the date of transfer.

The Madras High Court held that Sec 54F exemption shall be denied only if multiple houses are under “EXCLUSIVE OWNERSHIP” of the assessee. In the instant case, as on the date of transfer, she owned a joint property but she is not the exclusive owner of a residential house as on the date of transfer. Hence, Sec 54F exemption is allowed.

[Dr.Smt.P.K.Vasanthi Rangarajan Vs CIT] [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 299] [Madras]

Case law # 9: Case law on Lease premium [688 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

In “Krishak  Bharati Co-Operative Vs DCIT” [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 265] [Delhi HC], the High Court Held that lease premium amortization is not deductible. Further the court held that merely because the assessee had claimed the pro-rata lease premium as expenditure for 15 years, the same cannot be allowed by adherence to the rule of consistency which is leading to anomalous results.

Case law # 10: Case law on Brought Forward Losses [691 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

The assessee was carrying on the business of sale and purchase of properties and also earning rental and other income. By virtue of the specific provisions of the Act, the rental income is offered under IHP even though he was a dealer in properties. During a year, the assessee incurred losses in his real estate business (IHP Losses). He wants to set off the same against the subsequent year income from other business. The AO denied the same by arguing that the IHP Losses of earlier years can be set off only against the current year IHP Incomes but not against the business incomes.  The HC rejected the claim of the AO and held that the set off is allowable as both represent business incomes / business losses even though assessable under different heads by virtue of specific provisions of the Act.

[Lavish Apartment (P) Ltd Vs ACIT] [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 414] [Delhi HC]

Case law # 11: Case law on Sec 194J [693 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Supply of news by agencies to a news paper company is professional service and invites Sec 194J but not Sec 194C.

[ACIT Vs Ushodaya Enterprises P Ltd] [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 258] [Hyderabad – Trib]

 

Case law # 12: Case law on Depreciation [695 Page Aug 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

“Approach Road to Factory” is treated as a part of Factory Building and hence eligible for depreciation under the category “Factory Buildings”. [CIT Vs Sunshine Glass Indus (P) Ltd] [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 336] [Rajasthan High Court]

Case law # 13: Case law on Royalty [176 Page Sep 16th to 30th , 2012 – CPT]:

Sec 9(1)(vi) has been retrospectively amended by the Finance Act, 2012 to cover “Software” as “Royalty”. Earlier in several decisions, the courts held that “Software” is a copyrighted article but not copyright itself. But the Finance Act, 2012 retrospectively amended the definition of royalty to cover software also.

Though, Sec 9 is amended, other sections dealing with ROYALTY were not amended. Hence, the TDS provisions [Sec 40(a)(ia)] are not applicable. Hence, the department cannot disallow the same even if the necessary TDS is not done on such types of payments to residents. [Sonata Information Technology Limited Vs DCIT] [2012] [25 Taxmann.com 125] [Mumbai – Trib]

Similarly, Article 12 of DTAAs dealing with “Royalty” are not yet amended and hence the assessee can claim the benefit of DTAA provisions. [DIT Vs Nokia Networks OY] [2012] [25 Taxmann.com 225] [Delhi – High Court]

Case law # 14: Case law on Scientific Research [178 Page Sep 16th to 30th , 2012 – CPT]:

Even if scientific research does not have desired result, amount incurred thereon gets deduction U/S 35. It is so because, the words used are “SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH” but not “Scientific Invention.” [Dy DIT Vs Mastek Ltd] [2012] [25 Taxamnn.com 133] [Gujarat High Court]

Case law # 15: Case law on MAT Credit [179 Page Sep 16th to 30th , 2012 – CPT]:

MAT does not include surcharge and education cess and hence, credit for the same is not allowable.

“Richa Global Exports P Ltd Vs ACIT” [2012] [25 Taxmann.com 1] [Delhi – Tribunal]

Case law # 16: Case law on Contingent Deposits in leasing transactions [182 Page Sep 16th to 30th , 2012 – CPT]:

In “Sundaram Finance Ltd Vs ACIT [2012] [25 Taxmann.com 247] [SC]”, the assessee was engaged in the business of hire purchase financing, equipment leasing and allied activities. During the relevant previous year, it collected certain sums as “CONTINGENT DEPOSITS” from the customers with a view to protect itself from sales tax liability. The sales tax liability was in dispute with the sales tax authorities and matters were pending before the High Court. These deposits were not offered as income by the assessee.

The Apex Court held that in taxing a receipt, the true legal character of the transaction is to be determined. In the instant case, as the assessee utilized them in their business rather than depositing in a separate interest bearing bank account, the same amounts to business receipts and hence, were liable to be taxed U/S 28 as business income.

Case law # 17: Case law on Know How [185 Page Sep 16th to 30th , 2012 – CPT]:

The assessee was a manufacturer of mining equipments and it entered into technical assistance agreement with an American company for acquiring technical know-how. Consideration under the said agreement was to be paid in instalments. The assessee paid the first installment and later on the agreement was cancelled and the technical know-how was not transferred to the assessee. Now the assessee claimed the first installment U/S 37. The Apex court held that once Sec 35AB comes into picture, the deduction is to be claimed only under that section but not U/S 37. Hence, technical know-how is to be claimed only U/S 35AB even if the agreement is cancelled at a later stage. “Drilcos (India) P Ltd Vs CIT” [2012] [25 Taxmann.com 228] [SC]”

Case law # 18: Case law on Appeals [187 Page Sep 16th to 30th , 2012 – CPT]:

Once the assessee files an appeal U/S 246A with the CIT (A), the same cannot be withdrawn even if the department did not have any objection to such withdrawal. “M.Loganathan Vs ITO” [2012 – 25 Taxmann.com 174] [Madras HC]

Case law # 19: Case law on 54EC [537 Page July 16th to 31st , 2012 – CPT]:

As per the provisions of Sec 54EC, one can claim exemption of capital gains U/S 54EC, if he invests the sale proceeds in notified bonds within 6 months. The Kolkatta Tribunal held that the said period of 6 months is to be reckoned from the date of receipt of consideration but not from the date of transfer. Further, where the consideration is received in installments, the time limit is to be counted from the date of receipt of each such installment.[Chanchal Kumar Sircar Vs ITO] [2012 - 18 Taxmann.com 304]

Case law # 20: Case law on filing additional claims other wise than by way of revised return [587 Page July 16th to 31st , 2012 – CPT]:

As per the Apex Court’s judgment in the case of Goetze India Ltd, the assessee can file any additional claims only through revised returns but not through any other method. The Mumbai High Court in a recent case explained the scope of the above said decision with regard to appeals. It was held that the additional claims can be made before the appellate authorities otherwise than through revised returns also [i.e Even though the AO is not empowered to allow additional claim based on a letter requesting him to do so, but the appellate authorities are entitled to act based on such letters.]

“CIT Vs Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders (p) ltd” [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 23] [Mumbai HC]

 

 

Case law # 21: Case law on sister company transactions [591 Page July 16th to 31st , 2012 – CPT]:

Where the assessee bought the shares at a high price and sold the same to its sister concern at a low price, the resulting capital losses shall not be allowed as deduction unless there is any genuine material explaining the same. These types of losses are neither allowed as “Capital Losses” nor allowed as “Revenue Losses” and hence, they will be ignored under the provisions of the Income Tax Act.

[Premier Synthetic Industries Vs ITO] [2012 – 22 Taxmann.com 333] [Madras High Court]

Case law # 21: Case law on TDS U/S 194C [595 Page July 16th to 31st , 2012 – CPT]:

 Air freight paid to agent of foreign airlines does not attract TDS U/S 194C as the agents has acted merely as agents of the respective airlines and accepted freight payment not in their own account.

Similarly, TDS U/S 195 is not attracted as the foreign airlines concerned has no primary liability to pay tax. Thus, there cannot be any vicarious liability of assessee U/S 195 to deduct TDS from sums in which income element is absent.

[Taj Leather Works Vs ACIT] [2012] [23 Taxmann.com 58] [Kolkatta – Tribunal]

Case law # 22: Case law on TDS [488 Page July 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

U/S 206AA, where PAN is not furnished TDS is required to be done at 20% or such higher rate as the case may be. However, where the income of the depositors is below the taxable limit, the banks should not insist on PAN for opening accounts. Also, the banks should not deduct TDS at 20% in such cases where PAN is not furnished.

[Smt A.Kowsalya Bai Vs UOI] [2012 – 22 Taxmann.com 157] [Karnataka – High Court]

Case law # 23: Case law on 54F [489 Page July 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Deduction U/S 54F cannot be denied even if the new property has been acquired by the assessee in his wife’s name. However, in such cases, clubbing provisions U/S 27 read with Sec 22 will be applicable and income derived from such property is assessable in the hands of the assessee.

[S.Krishna Kumar Vs ACIT] [2012 – 22 Taxmann.com 200] [Chennai – Tribunal]

Case law # 24: Case law on Sec 40a(ia) [253 Page June 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

In “Merilyn Shipping & Transports Vs ACIT” [2012] [20 Taxmann.com 244] [Visakhapatnam – Tribunal SB], the Tribunal interpreted the literal meaning of the expression contained in Sec 40a(ia) and held that disallowance of expenditure for non-deduction of tax at source will apply only in respect of expenditures which are shown as outstanding and payable at the end of the year. It held that in respect of expenditures which have been paid without TDS during the year, the provisions of Sec 40a(ia) will not apply.

Case law # 25: Case law on Sec 147 [270 Page June 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Where a completed assessment is re-opened U/S 147 based on a statement recorded U/S 131, it was held that opening of assessment U/S 147 was justified. Thus, assessment can be re-opened on the basis of statement recorded U/S 131.

[Money Growth Investments and Consultants Private Limited] [2012] [21 Taxmann.com 438] [Delhi – High Court]

Case law # 26: Case law on Period of Holding for the purposes of capital gains [273 Page June 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

While counting the period of holding, the date of acquisition as well as the date of transfer are to be included. Hence, if the assessee purchases a capital asset as on 15th June 2011, it will be treated as Long Term Capital Asset, if the same is transferred on 15th June 2014 as the period of 3 years expires on 14th June 2014. [Bharti Gupta Ramola Vs CIT] [2012] [20 Taxmann.com 762 – Delhi HC]

Case law # 27: Case law on TDS U/S 194C [175 Page May 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

It was held in the case of “CIT Vs Career Launcher India Ltd” [2012] [20 Taxmann.com 637] [Delhi], TDS U/S 194C is not attracted for franchise arrangement for coaching classes. It is so because, the contract envisaged U/S 194C would be one under which one person merely renders certain services to other person for consideration. On the other hand, in the case of franchise agreements, sums are paid towards use of a person’s trade name or goodwill or know-how. Hence, TDS U/S 194C is not applicable in those cases.

Case law # 28: Case law on Sec 50 [178 Page May 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Sec 50 would be applicable only if the depreciation was claimed. Where the assessee bought plant and machinery and he never claimed depreciation, then capital gains arising there from would be long term in nature if the asset was held for more than 36 months prior to the date of transfer.

[CIT Vs Santosh Structural & Alloys Ltd] [2012 – 20 Taxmann.com 501] [Punj & Har – High Court]

Case law # 29: Case law on Cost of assets [181 Page May 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]: and [54th Page of Sep 1st to 15th, 2012]:

Where the assessee had acquired asset with borrowed capital, and later when the borrowed amount was waived, the same needs to be reduced from the cost of acquisition for the purposes of depreciation. [Steel Authority of India Limited Vs CIT] [2012 – 20 Taxmann.com 198] [Delhi-High Court].

 

 

Case law # 30: Case law on Sec 23(2) [780 Page April 16th to 30th, 2012 – CPT]:

We know that value of one Self Occupied Property is nil for an individual. Can this benefit be claimed by the HUF? The Gujarat High Court held “Yes”.

[CIT Vs Hariprasad Bhojnagarwala] [2012] [20 Taxmann.com 316]

Case law # 31: Case law on Sec 194-I [801 Page April 16th to 30th, 2012 – CPT]:

TDS U/S 194-I will be attracted only if the control and possession of the asset is given to the payer. “Use of Asset” is different from “Assets given for use.” Sec 194-I covers the cases where “Assets given for use”.

Thus, where the assessee purchased power and uses the transmission lines and equipment of another, the charges paid for using transmission lines is not subjected to TDS U/S 194-I as control and possession over these transmission lines were never given to the payer but the payer is simply allowed to use the assets along with other users. On a similar analogy, where a bus operator collects charges from different schools for transporting children of several schools without the bus being at the disposal of any one school, TDS U/S 194-I is not warranted.

[Chattisgarh State Electricity Board Vs ITO] [2012] [18 Taxmann.com 150] [Mum-Tribunal]

Case law # 32: Case law on “Assessee in default” [803 Page April 16th to 30th, 2012 – CPT]:

Where TDS is not done by the payer but the recipient of the income has paid taxes on the same, the payer cannot be treated as assessee in default and hence tax cannot be recovered from him. However, the payer is liable to pay interest for delay in remittance of TDS and penalty for non-recovery of TDS even in these cases. [Chattisgarh State Electricity Board Vs ITO] [2012] [18 Taxmann.com 150] [Mum-Tribunal] [Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (p) ltd Vs CIT] [2007] [163 Taxman 355]

Case law # 33: Case law on “Depreciation” [808 Page April 16th to 30th, 2012 – CPT]:

In the case of finance lease, the lessee can claim depreciation as he is the real owner. On the other hand, if the assets are given under operating lease, the lessor can continue to claim depreciation.

[Indus Ind Bank Ltd Vs Addl CIT] [2012] [19 Taxmann.com 173] [Mumbai – Tribunal] [SB]

Case law # 34: Case law on “Penalty” [814 Page April 16th to 30th, 2012 – CPT]:

Where the return filed by the assessee was processed U/S 143(1)(a) without levying penalty U/S 271B for non-filing audit report, the same (penalty) cannot be levied during the re-assessment proceedings. [Jasbir Singh Vs CIT] [2012][20 Taxmann.com 202] [Punjab & Haryana HC]

Case law # 35: Case law on “Re-Assessment” [673 Page April 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Re-opening of closed assessment cannot be made merely on the basis of objections raised by revenue audit party U/S 147. As per the provisions of Sec 147, it is only the AO’s opinion with respect to income escaping assessment which is relevant for the purposes of re-opening of an assessment.

[Cadila Health Care Ltd Vs ACIT (OSD)] [Civil Appl No. 15566 of 2011] [Gujarat HC]

Case law # 36: Case law on Sec 54F [673 Page April 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

It is held that Sec 54F is a beneficial provision for promoting construction of residential houses, and therefore, it has to be construed liberally for achieving purpose for which it was incorporated in statute.

Once it is demonstrated that consideration received on transfer of capital asset has been invested either in purchase or in construction of a residential house, even though, these transactions are not complete in all respects as required under law, same would not disentitle the assessee from benefit of exemption U/S 54F.

[CIT Vs Sambandam Uday Kumar] [2012] [19 Taxmann.com 17] [Karnataka – HC]

Case law # 37: Case law on Sec 194C [673 Page April 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Production of motion films or cinematographic films would fall within the meaning of expression “WORK” as contemplated in Sec 194C and hence liable for TDS. Thus, where the assessee agreed to produce a film in Hindi under title “Tango Charlie”, TDS would be attracted on the same U/S 194C. [Nitin M.Panchamiya Vs ACIT] [2012] [19 Taxmann.com 200] [Mumbai – Tribunal].

Case law # 38: Case law on Slump sale [627 Page March 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Negative net worth will increase the capital gains under slump sale. The assessee company transferred its entire power transmission business to another company for Rs 143 Crores and there was a negative networth of Rs 157 Crores as per Sec 50B. (i.e Liabilities exceeded assets by Rs 157 Crores]. In such a case, the capital gains would be Rs 143 Crores + Rs 157 Crores. And hence, the assessee is liable to pay capital gains on Rs 300 Crores.

[Dy CIT Vs Summit Securities Ltd] [2012] [19 Taxmann.com 102] [Mumbai – Trib] [SB]

Case law # 39: Case law on 269SS [628 Page March 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Where the assessee who was in financial crisis received cash in several installments (Each being less than Rs 20,000] from its sister concern, the same cannot be held as “Loan U/S 269SS” and hence penalty could not be levied. [CIT Vs Bangalore Leather & Leather Crafts Ltd] [2012] [19 Taxmann.com 21] [Karnataka – High Court]

 

Case law # 40: Case law on Capital Gains [629 Page March 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Where the assessee sold a cinema hall and it paid certain sums to a tenant, who was running a canteen in the said cinema hall for vacating the said premises, the Delhi HC held that the same is allowed as deduction while computing capital gains. [CIT Vs Eagle Theatres] [2012] [19 Taxmann.com 7] [Delhi HC]

Case law # 41: Case law on Sec 22 [474 Page March 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Owner and occupier should be same to get exemption from tax U/S 22. Thus, where an individual who was a joint owner of a house property gave the same on lease to a firm in which he was a partner, he cannot claim exemption given U/S 22. Hence, he is liable to offer the rental income to tax.  [Prodip Kumar Bothra Vs CIT] [2012] [18 Taxmann.com 177] [Kol – HC]

Case law # 42: Case law on Interest [343 Page Feb 16th to 29th, 2012 – CPT]:

Interest on housing loan is allowed as deduction U/S 24(b) even if the loan is not taken from a bank or financial institution. However, for deduction U/S 80-C in respect of repayment of principal amount, it is necessary that loan is repayable to a bank or financial institution.

Case law # 43: Case law on Interest [371 Page Feb 16th to 29th, 2012 – CPT]:

Gift received on the occasion of own marriage is exempt U/S 56 and not the gift received on the marriage of one’s child. [Rajinder Mohan Lal Vs DCIT] [2012] [18 Taxmann.com 91] [Chandigarh – Trib]

Case law # 44: Case law on Trusts [372 Page Feb 16th to 29th, 2012 – CPT]:

In “CIT Vs Sri Durga Nimishambha Trust” [2012] [18 Taxmann.com 173] [Karnataka], it was held that corpus fund cannot be taxed even if the same was misused by the trust. It is so because, corpus fund cannot be treated as income. The only option available to the department is to approach the Central Government for withdrawal of recognition granted to the trust U/S 12A.

Case law # 44: Case law on Refunds [295 Page Feb 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

The department cannot adjust tax refunds of one year with tax dues of another year without following prescribed procedure. [i.e Advance intimation is to be given to the assessee of the fact of adjusting the same. Also, opportunity is to be given to the assessee.] [Genpact India Vs ACIT] [2012 – 17 Taxmann.com 145] [Delhi – HC]

Case law # 45: Case law on Sec 148 [300 Page Feb 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

In “CIT Vs SPL’s Siddhartha Ltd” [2012] [17 Taxmann.com 138], it was held that notice U/S 148 is invalid if approval is taken from CIT instead of designated authority of JCIT.  

 

 

Case law # 46: Case law on MAT [124 Page Jan 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Where a foreign company does not have any presence in India, it is not liable to the provisions of MAT. However, where the foreign company is having any PE (Permanent Establishment) in India, MAT provisions are applicable as the said PE is required to prepare financial statements as per the provisions of Indian Companies Act. [Timken Company, Re – AAR – 2010 – 193 Taxman 20 – New Delhi].

On a similar reasoning, the Mumbai HC held that MAT provisions are not applicable to Electricity companies as they were not preparing the financials under the provisions of the Companies Act. However, this judgment is nullified by the retrospective amendment made by the Finance Act, 2012.  [Krung Thai Bank PCL Vs JDIT] [Intl Taxation – 2011 – 16 Taxmann.com 239]

Case law # 46: Case law on Capex Vs Revex [158 Page Jan 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Payment of non-compete fees amounted to capital expenditure and hence the same will not be allowed as deduction. [Pitney Bowes India P Ltd Vs CIT] [2012] [17 Taxmann.com116] [Delhi – HC]

Case law # 47A: Case law on Remuneration to partners [162 Page Jan 16th to 31st, 2012 – CPT]:

Payment of remuneration to partners cannot be allowed, if it has been left to be determined by partners at the end of the accounting period. [Sood Bhandari & Co Vs CBDT] [2012] [17 Taxmann.com 99] [Punj & Haryana – HC]

Case law # 47B: Case law on Royalty - SOFTWARE [7th Page Jan 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Payment for using the software for internal business purposes by downloading it on a hard disk and making backup copies would be regarded as royalty and hence, TDS deduction would be required. Thus, payments made towards license acquired for making copies of a shrink wrapped software are royalties and hence liable for TDS. [CIT Vs Samsung Electronics Company Ltd] [2011] [16 Taxmann.com 141] [Karnataka – HC]

Case law # 48: Case law on Royalty – Software [40th Page Jan 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Payment received by the non-resident assessee towards title and GSM System of which software was an inseparable part incapable of independent use would be a payment in accordance with contract for supply of goods. Hence, where software is an integral part of hardware which is not separable from the hardware, the same is not royalty and hence the provisions of TDS are not applicable. [DIT Vs Ericsson A.B. 2011 – 16 Taxmann.com 371] [Delhi – HC]

 

 

Case law # 49: Case law on AAR’s rulings [48th Page Sep 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Generally AAR’s rulings cannot be questioned before courts except under exceptional circumstances under Articles 227 and 136 of the Constitution. In a recent case, the Apex Court held that a writ is to be filed before the HC before an SLP is filed to the Supreme Court.

[Columbia Sports Company] [48th Page Volume 25 - Sep 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]

Case law # 50: Case law on Goodwill [72 Page Sep 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Goodwill arising on amalgamation is eligible for depreciation. [CIT Vs Smifs Securities Ltd] [2012] [24 Taxmann.com 222] [SC]

Case law # 51: Case law on Addl Depn [73 Page Sep 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

Additional depreciation is a statutory allowance. It cannot be limited to 50% by condition of usage of asset for 180 days. [DCIT Vs Cosmo Films Ltd] [2012] [24 Taxmann.com 189] [Delhi – Tribunal]

Case law # 52: Case law on Parking Charges [80 Page Sep 1st to 15th, 2012 – CPT]:

No TDS U/S 194-I for parking and landing charges paid by airlines. Contrary Judgment is given by the Madras High Court with that of the Delhi High Court.

[CIT Vs Singapore Airlines Ltd] [2012] [24 Taxmann.com 200] [Madras – HC]

 

 

Monday, August 27, 2012

X, an individual left India for the first time during 2011-12 for starting his own business in U.K. During the financial year 2011-12 he stayed in India only for 88 days. The Assessing officer treats him as resident for AY 2012-13 as his stay is more than 60 days in the current previous year and more than 365 days during the four previous years preceding the current previous year. Will you accept the contention of the Assessing Officer?


Answer:
The contention of the AO is wrong. Employment includes self employment as held in "O.Abdhul Rajak Vs CIT". Hence, the requirement of 182 days is to be satisfied as the assessee left India for the purposes of employment outside India. [Note the phrase used is "for the purposes of employment" but not "for employment purpose"].

Saturday, August 18, 2012

Question of the day...


X, an individual left India for the first time during 2011-12 for starting his own business in U.K. During the financial year 2011-12 he stayed in India only for 88 days. The Assessing officer treats him as resident for AY 2012-13 as his stay is more than 60 days in the current previous year and more than 365 days during the four previous years preceding the current  previous year. Will you accept the contention of the Assessing Officer? [Answer will be posted after 2 days]