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 2022 July Day 1 - Friday

TMI e-Newsletters FAQ
Login to see detailed Newsletter

TMI Tax Updates - e-Newsletter
July 1, 2022

Case Laws in this Newsletter:

GST Income Tax Customs Service Tax Central Excise



Highlights / Catch Notes

  • GST:

    Levy of GST - valuation - reimbursed amount of Stipend received from Industry Partner to be distributed to the trainees at actuals - pure agent service - the stipend paid by the Industry Partners to the applicant to be further paid to the trainees in full does not attract GST and is not required to be added to the taxable value. - AAR

  • GST:

    Profiteering - four towers/blocks of the project Celebrity Gardens - The Authority finds and determines that the Respondent has profiteered by an amount of Rs. 1,54,269/- for the project 'Celebrity Garden Block K' during the period of investigation i.e. 01.07.2017 to 30.09.2019. The above amount that has been profiteered by the Respondent from his Home buyers in the above mentioned project. The claim of their refund along with the interest @18% thereon, from the date when the above amount was profiteered by him till the date of such payment, in line with the provisions of Rule 133 (3) (b) of the CGST Rules 2017, need to be verified by the concerned CGST/SGST Commissionerate - NAPA

  • Income Tax:

    Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Time limit for notice - there is no document made available to prove that the notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2018 was sent for despatch to the appellant, within the end of the relevant assessment year i.e., 31.03.2018. Thus, it is crystal clear that the notice under section 148 for reopening the assessment was not sent to the appellant, within the time stipulated under section 149 of the Act and hence, the same vitiates the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 - HC

  • Income Tax:

    Validity of assessment order passed in the name of non-existent entity - merger - amalgamated company - Mere fact that the assessee has participated in the proceedings before the AO will not cure this substantive illegality and the mere participation of the assessee in the assessment proceedings cannot debar the assessee from challenging the proceedings on this ground as there is no estoppel against law. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Addition made u/s.43CA - difference between the stamp duty value and the reported sale consideration - the difference added by the ld. AO in the assessment falls below the tolerance band of 10% and hence, by applying the proviso to Section 43CA of the Act, no addition is required to be made in the instant case u/s.43CA - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Scope of limited scrutiny - AO went on to examine this aspect of low income, he then asked the assessee about the investment made during the year because the ld. Assessing Officer wanted to see why the assessee has earned low income when there are huge loans and advances. When AO was examining the loans and advances, he came to know that this is the first year of incorporation and the LLP has been converted from the company. AO asked the assessee about the source of investment. Then based on this question, the assessee submitted that the source is the share capital and security premium of the erstwhile company before being converted to LLP and the ld. AO went on to examine the issue of security premium reserve. - AO has not exceeded the jurisdiction - Decided in favor of revenue - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - reopening beyond four years - the reopening of assessment u/s 147 in the present case, without any reference to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all facts regarding the items in the return of income or books of account during the assessment proceeding, is not justified and is in violation to proviso to section 147. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    LTCG - FMV detrmination - AO computed assessee’s share being 1/4th of the long term capital gain - scope of section 9B of the Act which was brought on the Statute book by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f 1.4.2021 - As perused the provisions of Section 9B and also analysed the arguments made before us by both the Parties and find that there was no provision in the Act to compute the deemed gain in respect of assets of the firm upon reconstitution retirement of a partner. We also note that a specific provision was inserted by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 1.4.2021 providing for making such deemed addition on account of capital gain upon retirement of a person from the partnership firm which are applicable for AY 2021-22 and not to the year under consideration. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Revision u/s 263 - Assessee merely kept referring to the decision that an enquiry was made by the ld. AO and section 263 should not have been invoked. We, however, find no merit in the contention of the ld. Counsel for the assesse with regard to the issue of claim of depreciation on electrical installation because though the inquiry was initiated, but the same was incomplete as the assessee did not reply to it in the way it ought to be. - Therefore, in real terms, there was no enquiry on the said issue. - Revision order sustained - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Addition u/s.43CA - Addition deleted as difference in value between the stamp duty authority and the consideration reported by the assessee is less than 10% - whether this proviso could be given retrospective effect so as to confer benefit to the assessee in the instant case? - CIT(A) had rightly deleted the addition made u/s.43CA of the Act both under normal provisions of the Act as well as in the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. In any case, this sum does not fall within the ambit of Explanation to Section 115JB (2) of the Act and hence, the same can never be added back in the computation of book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Disallowance of remuneration paid by the assessee to its Working Partner u/s 40A(3) - Cash payment of expenditure in excess of specified limit - Scope of separate identity for the firm and its partners - As section 40A is a general provision and section 40(b) is a special provision and only in situation which are not covered by section 40(b), section 40A shall be applicable. In the present case, assessee being a partnership firm and section 40(b) being the special provision dealing with computation of income of firm, same shall be applicable for determining the amount of deduction available to the assessee. - No additions - AT

  • Income Tax:

    Disallowance of claim of bad debts - the advance made by the assessee in the ordinary course of business which is stock in trade is to be valued at cost or market price, whichever is less. In the present case, the debt has become bad and it being stock in trade the value is NIL. Therefore, it has to be considered as business loss and allowed. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    TDS u/s 194I - reimbursement of expenses - mobilization charges - the amount is part of rent of equipment or not - CIT(A) had merely reiterated the ultimate conclusions reached by the ld. AO without appreciating evidences filed by the assessee on record. But, the evidences filed by the assessee which are enclosed in the paper book filed before us together with the submissions thereon are staring on us which goes to prove clearly that the payments made by the assessee are nothing but reimbursements on which deduction of tax at source is not warranted. - AT

  • Income Tax:

    TP Adjustment - ALP adjustment on account of receipt of commission for Marketing Services - main contention of the appellant is that the functions undertaken by the assessee for selling the product is significantly different from what is undertaken for the purpose of earning the commission income from A.E - CIT-A deleted the adjustments - The reasoning given by the TPO that these two segments of the cost does not contribute to profit does not stand to any reason, in as much as the depreciation and the material actually contributes to the profits in the manufacturing segment. - AT

  • Customs:

    Import of Gold - bonafide baggage or not - the petitioner has violated the provisions of the Customs and Baggage Rules, 2016. The petitioner was duty bound to declare under provision of Baggage Rules, 2016 read with Customs Baggage Declaration Regulations, 2013. Sub-clause (b) to proviso Rule 3 read with annexure 1 of the Baggage Rules. 2016, gold or silver ornaments in any other form cannot be allowed to be cleared duty free as bonafide baggage if they exceeded Rs.15,000/-. Gold or silver in any other form are not bonafide baggage. - HC

  • Customs:

    Exemption form Customs duty for goods imported for use in the manufacture of finished goods in the nature of PCB assemblies - the appellant’s factory is manufacturer of induction melting and heating furnace as well as induction welding equipment - the goods imported by the appellant is squarely covered under the table given in the notification and also the finished goods wherein the same is also clearly given in the table accordingly, the appellant is entitled for exemption. - AT

  • Service Tax:

    Computation of Service tax liability - Works Contract - the order of Court below calculating the service tax liability on 100% of the turn-over under works contract service is illegal and irresponsible in view of the mandate of law - The appellant are directed to calculate the service tax payable under the Rules and file a calculation sheet before the assessing officer. If any amount is still payable by them they shall pay the same. It is further held that under such circumstances no interest is payable - AT

  • Central Excise:

    Quashing of prosecution under Sections 9 and 9-AA of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - there is no exoneration or finding on merits by the CESTAT on the subject matter of the criminal complaints. In the said facts, the High Court was incorrect and wrong in quashing the criminal prosecution only on the ground that the tribunal has granted stay, subject to condition of pre-deposit, of the recovery of the tax and the penalty amount. - SC

  • Central Excise:

    Clandestine Removal - Cigarettes - unaccounted stock - In absence of any linkage of the factory of appellants with the alleged Railway Receipts or third party private records or with third party statements, there are no grounds to hold manufacture and clandestine removal of such huge quantities of cigarettes. The demand based upon Railway receipt and document of transporters is not sustainable - AT


Articles


Notifications


Circulars / Instructions / Orders


News


Case Laws:

  • GST

  • 2022 (6) TMI 1285
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1284
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1286
  • Income Tax

  • 2022 (6) TMI 1280
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1279
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1278
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1277
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1276
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1275
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1283
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1274
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1273
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1272
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1271
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1282
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1281
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1270
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1269
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1268
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1267
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1266
  • Customs

  • 2022 (6) TMI 1263
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1265
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1264
  • Service Tax

  • 2022 (6) TMI 1262
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1261
  • Central Excise

  • 2022 (6) TMI 1259
  • 2022 (6) TMI 1260
 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates