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 2021 March Day 30 - Tuesday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
You need to Subscribe a package.

Newsletter: Where Service Meets Reader Approval.

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
March 30, 2021

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Corporate Laws Insolvency & Bankruptcy PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Indian Laws



Highlights / Catch Notes

    GST

  • Rectification of Mistake - Applicant submits that the lower authority (AAR) had held that their activity would qualify as supply of goods attracting 12% whereas in the impugned order dated 27.9.2020, their activity has been classified as attracting 18% - A mistake apparent from the record is one to point out and for which no elaborate argument is required. It must be a glaring, obvious or self-evident mistake. - Section 102 of the CGST Act cannot be pressed into play in order to make a revision in a matter on which there could be two plausible interpretations - AAAR

  • Validity of non reversal of differential tax amount arising out of change in tax regime from Value Added Tax (VAT) to Goods and Service Tax (GST) with effect from 1st July, 2017 - Petitioner shall make a comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority within four weeks from today ventilating the grievance. - HC

  • Income Tax

  • Contempt action against the IRS for not following the directions issued by the Court - With regard to the effective date of such circular, which is stated to be 17.06.2019. We find that these issues neither directly nor indirectly arose for consideration in the contempt petition. There appears to be no pleadings to the said effect. - Consequently, the Revenue had no opportunity to put forth their stand. Thus, we are fully convinced that no such direction could have been issued by the learned Contempt Court after having held that there is no merit in the contempt petition. - HC

  • TDS u/s 195 - payment towards license fees pursuant to the distribution agreement - in our considered view, the documents submitted before us clearly shows that the income of the payee is not taxable in India and assessee has already filed the relevant information u/s 201(1) of the Act which shows that the assessee cannot be regarded as ‘assessee in default’. - AT

  • Assessment u/s 153A - corroboration by way of independent evidence - the addition can be made on the basis of the seized diary only if proper nexus is established and same is corroborated with relevant material. If the Ld. A.O is not able to establish any such nexus between the notings in the seized diary and the actual transaction having taken place then no addition deserves to be made and if found otherwise Ld. A.O can make addition as permissible under the law. - AT

  • Undisclosed income - uring the course of search cash sum was found - If the Ld. A.O was not satisfied with the cash in hand shown by the assessee and individuals as on 31.3.2016 he should have taken necessary action during Assessment Year 2016-17 but in absence there of it has to be presumed that the Ld. A.O has accepted the position of cash in hand as on 31.3.2016 shown by the assessee firm and its partners and wife of the partner which stood. - A.O was not justified in making the addition towards cash as explained - AT

  • Deduction claimed u/sec. 80P(2)(d) - In the instant case, the Assessee has earned interest income from Krishna District Co-operative Central Bank (KDCCB) and it is not the case of the Revenue Department that KDCCB is not a co-operative society. Therefore on the aforesaid consideration and analyzations, the decision of the ld. CIT(A) qua issue in hand is set aside and the AO is directed to allow the deduction claimed u/sec. 80P(2)(d) of the Act by the Assessee . - AT

  • Weighted deduction u/s.35(2AB) - capital and revenue expenditure incurred on in-house R & D facility - It is not in dispute that the Assessee in the present case obtained approval in Form No.3CM as required by Rule 6 (5A) of the Rules. The deduction u/s.35(2AB) ought to have been allowed as weighted deduction at 200% of the expenditure as claimed by the Assessee and ought not to have been restricted to 100% of the expenditure incurred on scientific research. - AT

  • Denial of the credit of TDS - assessee has offer the income to tax which was received as commission income - the TDS on the said income even if deposited in the PAN of the deceased husband of the assessee due to inadvertence or mistake, it would not lead to denial of the claim of credit to the assessee, who has offered the said income to tax. - AT

  • Maintainability of appeal - AO himself had filed remand report before CIT(A) - Revenue cannot be held to be an aggrieved party once the Assessing Officer himself finds assessee's explanation to be genuine. We thus hold in view of Assessing Officer's remand report that the Revenue's instant appeal deserves to be declined even on the ground of maintainability itself. - AT

  • Delay in filing the present appeals by 43 days - there is no culpable negligence or malafide on the part of the assessee in delayed filing of the present appeal and it does not stand to benefit by resorting to such delay more so considering the fact that it has applied for settlement of present dispute and payment of appropriate taxes. - Delay condoned - AT

  • Rejection of books of accounts - difference in the opening stock as well as the closing stock - the assessee has shown excess opening stock - The AO did not care to consider that whether the assessee is having the above stock as actual stock with the assessee and if so what is the source of investment for the above stock. The Assessing Officer has not even examined the source of stock nor was such stock found during the course of survey - No purchase vouchers or details were also found during the course of survey - CIT(A) rightly deleted the additions - AT

  • Customs

  • Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 - Favouritism shown to the IEC holder - The Tribunal has re-appreciated the evidence and agreed with the finding of the Adjudicating Authority, which was confirmed by the first appellate authority. Therefore, we do not agree with the submissions made on behalf of the appellant that the order is a perfunctory order and it did not consider the evidence placed before it. - HC

  • Revocation of Customs Broker License - In para 14.4, the adjudicating authority has noted that the appellant verified the IEC and GST registration from the official website of DGFT and GSTIN and also the PAN and Aadhar details. From such facts, it is clear that the appellant has done the duty of verification as required by an ordinary prudent person while handling customs clearance work. - Further, the proceedings are vitiated by noncompliance of time limit prescribed in the Regulation - AT

  • Smuggling - Gold - The onus lies on the Revenue to prove that the goods in question are of smuggled in nature, which the Revenue has failed to discharge their onus with proper evidence. In the impugned order, it is held on the basis of assumption & presumption that the gold is of smuggled in nature which cannot be appreciated. - AT

  • Smuggling - Gold - Seizure of gold - period of limitation - The appellant has able passed their onus of ownership acquisition of the gold in question. As the appellant has able to prove the source of acquisition of the gold in question, the same cannot be confiscated - absolute confiscation of the gold is set aside and the car in question and imposing penalty on the appellant. - AT

  • Indian Laws

  • Sale of Electoral Bonds under the Electoral Bond Scheme, 2018 - Scheme allows the donors of political parties to maintain anonymity - Though the information furnished by the buyer shall be treated confidential by the authorised bank and shall not be disclosed to any authority for any purposes, it is subject to one exception namely when demanded by a competent court or upon registration of criminal case by any law enforcement agency. A nonKYC compliant application or an application not meeting the requirements of the scheme shall be rejected. - The apprehension that foreign corporate houses may buy the bonds and attempt to influence the electoral process in the country, is also misconceived. - SC

  • Dishonor of cheque - compounding of offences - The parties have agreed to end the proceedings by way of compromise and the opposite party no.2 has already received the entire amount of cheque as well as cost/ interest of ₹ 10,000/- , this Court deems it appropriate to compound the offence on the basis of compromise deed dated 19.2.2021 entered into between the parties. - the revisionist is directed to pay a cost of 15% of the cheque amount to the High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court - HC

  • IBC

  • CIRP - Fresh claim of Sales Tax Dues after submission of Resolution plan for approval - Time limitation - Appellant / Revenue department has argued that the initiation of CIRP and the public notice inviting claims were not in his knowledge - Any interruption in the CIR Process at this stage by including a delayed claim/s would have meant setting the clock back and sending matter back to COC & RP. It cannot be ruled out that if the claim of the Operational Creditor State Tax Department, Government of Maharashtra was accepted at such a late stage, there could have been other such applicants too, who would have demanded accommodation on the same ground allowing late submission of their claims once this window would have opened. It would be trite to emphasise the fact that this would have meant complete disruption of the CIRP and the timelines stipulated therein.- AT

  • PMLA

  • Validity of imposition of “debit-freeze” of the bank accounts - PMLA - The sine qua non for exercise of the powers under either section 5 or section 17 of the Act is the formation of an opinion, by a competent officer, that the conditions set out in these sections are found to exist. In the absence of such a finding, the exercise of power under these Sections would be without basis and cannot survive in the absence of these requirements. There are no such reasons recorded in the order dated 6.11.2020. - HC


Articles


Notifications


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1145
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1140
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1139
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1136
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1131
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1128
  • Income Tax

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1133
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1130
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1127
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1125
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1124
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1122
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1121
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1118
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1113
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1112
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1109
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1108
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1107
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1106
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1105
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1104
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1103
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1102
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1101
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1100
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1099
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1098
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1097
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1095
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1094
  • Customs

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1138
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1119
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1114
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1111
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1110
  • Corporate Laws

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1142
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1126
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1143
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1123
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1120
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1096
  • PMLA

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1132
  • Service Tax

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1117
  • Central Excise

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1116
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1115
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1141
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1129
  • Indian Laws

  • 2021 (3) TMI 1144
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1137
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1135
  • 2021 (3) TMI 1134
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates