Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Tax Updates - TMI e-Newsletters

Home e-Newsletters Index Year 2020 November Day 4 - Wednesday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
Login to see detailed Newsletter

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
November 4, 2020

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy Service Tax



Highlights / Catch Notes

  • Income Tax:

    Settlement Application under Section 245C - DGIT jurisdiction to issue the SCN - While the DGIT is deemed to be an 'Income Tax Authority' for the purposes of the Act, by virtue of Section 116, the ITSC is a statutory body created under Section 245B of the Act. It is rather unfortunate that a high ranking official as that of DGIT, was ignorant to understand the basic powers vested on him. - The DGIT had shockingly exceeded its powers and therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained. - HC

  • Income Tax:

    Revision u/s 263 - It is settled principle of law that once the High Court lays down particular the proposition of law, the same is deemed to be in existence from the inception. Fact would clearly suggest that there was no material on record to hold that the legal and professional expenses are not allowable as revenue expenditure. AO only took one of the possible views and, therefore, the Pr. CIT was not justified in exercising the power of revision - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Forfeiture of amount - Addition of amount forfeited by assessee on share warrants u/s 43(5) - amount received on account of forfeiture of amount due to non payment towards warrants issue has to be treated as capital receipt and since the assessee has also transferred it to the capital reserve account in the balance sheet, the amount cannot be taxed as income. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Computation of MAT u/s 115JB - Addition towards delayed payment of gratuity and leave encashment - in computation of book profit only provision for unascertained liability is required to be added back. Provision for gratuity and leave encashment, being ascertained liabilities are not required to be added back to book profits u/s. 115JB - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Assessment u/s. 153A - income earned from undisclosed sources - unexplained investment u/s. 69 - AO has not referred to any incriminating material found during the course of search in the assessment order. Nothing is found contrary to the stated position of the assessee, therefore, the assessment framed u/s. 153A of the Act is not sustainable - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Additions u/s 68 - Any appellate authority cannot reject the evidences without any discussion or reason. The CIT (A) has not mentioned as to what more evidence were needed to be produced by the assessee to substantiate its contention or what are the material or information to rebut the assessee’s explanation and evidences as discussed above. AO as well as the CIT(A) failed to appreciate or consider the more than sufficient evidences placed on record by the assessee to discharge the onus u/s 68 - Addition made u/s 68 of the Act is hereby deleted. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Unexplained cash credit received from bogus entities - discharge of onus - we are unable to find any such material except for the fact that additions were made merely on suspicious, conjectures and surmises. - No addition can sustain - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Disallowance of depreciation on the intangible assets/goodwill acquired in the scheme of amalgamation - AO directed to allow the claim of the assessee for the depreciation on the impugned goodwill. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Levy fee u/s 234E - processing the TDS statement - Intimation u/s 200A - Late filing of TDS returns / statement - even-though section 234E of the Act was in the statute prior to 01.06.2015, however, in absence of any enabling provision, no fee under section 234E of the Act can be levied for late filing of TDS statement for any period prior to 01.06.2015. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Addition on account of capital gains - addition u/s 50C - In the absence of production of the Purchase Deed and source of construction made on the impugned property, would clearly show that the valuation report have been manipulated by assessee just to avoid payment of capital gains tax to the Revenue Department. The valuation report is of no reliance. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Disallowance of 10% of the purchases made by the assessee from the sister concern - No addition can be made basing on suspicion, when the books are available before the assessing officer to bring out material sufficient to support his suspicion. In the absence of any such evidence, no ad hoc disallowance could be sustained - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Carry forward of balance additional depreciation to the following years - whether tribunal was right in holding additional depreciation can be allowed in the next year in case the same cannot be allowed in the earlier year? - Held Yes - HC

  • Customs:

    Validity of conviction made - conviction based solely on the purported confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act - evidentiary value present or not - to arrive at the conclusion that a confessional statement made before an officer designated under section 42 or section 53 can be the basis to convict a person under the NDPS Act, without any non obstante clause doing away with section 25 of the Evidence Act, and without any safeguards, would be a direct infringement of the constitutional guarantees contained in Articles 14, 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution of India. - SC

  • IBC:

    Neither Section 14 nor Section 31 of the IB Code place any fetters on Banks/Financial Institutions from initiation and continuation of the proceedings against the guarantor for recovering their dues. That being the position, the plea taken by the counsel for the petitioner that all proceedings against the petitioner, who is only a guarantor, ought to be stayed under the SARFESI Act during the continuation of the Insolvency Resolution process qua the Principal Borrower, is rejected as meritless. - HC

  • SEBI:

    Downgrading petitioner's bank loans' rating to 'IND BB+' from 'IND BBB - As third respondent is a private body and not a “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and by rating its clients, the third respondent is not discharging any public function and the subject matter involves analysis by financial experts and the petitioner is having effective alternative remedies, we dismiss this writ petition as not maintainable. - HC


Articles


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2020 (11) TMI 53
  • 2020 (11) TMI 72
  • 2020 (11) TMI 42
  • Income Tax

  • 2020 (11) TMI 70
  • 2020 (11) TMI 69
  • 2020 (11) TMI 41
  • 2020 (11) TMI 50
  • 2020 (11) TMI 49
  • 2020 (11) TMI 68
  • 2020 (11) TMI 48
  • 2020 (11) TMI 47
  • 2020 (11) TMI 46
  • 2020 (11) TMI 52
  • 2020 (11) TMI 67
  • 2020 (11) TMI 66
  • 2020 (11) TMI 45
  • 2020 (11) TMI 65
  • 2020 (11) TMI 64
  • 2020 (11) TMI 63
  • 2020 (11) TMI 43
  • 2020 (11) TMI 71
  • Customs

  • 2020 (11) TMI 55
  • 2020 (11) TMI 51
  • Corporate Laws

  • 2020 (11) TMI 62
  • 2020 (11) TMI 61
  • 2020 (11) TMI 60
  • 2020 (11) TMI 59
  • 2020 (11) TMI 58
  • 2020 (11) TMI 57
  • Securities / SEBI

  • 2020 (11) TMI 56
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2020 (11) TMI 54
  • Service Tax

  • 2020 (11) TMI 44
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates