Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Devaram M. Dharmavat Versus ITO, Ward-5 (4) , Pune and Vica-Versa

Validity of reopening u/s.147 - proportionate deduction u/s.80IB(10) - Held that:- As regards the argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that no reasons are recorded for issue of notice u/s.148 for both these assessment years, we find from the perusal of the order sheet entries that the reasons recorded by the AO are sufficient for reopening of the assessment. The argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the reopening is based on change of opinion is without any merit since the as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ior to 01-04-2005 and the assessee has admittedly completed construction of all the 7 buildings, therefore, the denial of deduction u/s.80IB(10) for non production of completion certificate for the 7th building is not justified in view of the decision of M/s. Satish Bora & Associates Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2011 (1) TMI 1215 - ITAT PUNE ). In view of the above decision, the assessee is not required at all to submit the completion certificate since the project has admittedly .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- SHRI R.K. PANDA AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JJ. For The Appellant: Shri S.N. Doshi For The Department Shri Rajesh Damor ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM ITA Nos. 908 to 910/PN/2010 filed by the assessee relating to Assessment Years 2007-08, 2006-07 & 2005-06 respectively are recalled matters for the limited purpose of deciding certain issues which remained to be adjudicated by the Tribunal. ITA Nos. 1873 to 1875/PN/2013 filed by the Assessee and ITA Nos. 1941 to 1943/PN/2013 filed by the Revenue are c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 11-06-2013 in M. A.No.80/PN/2011 recalled the order for the limited purpose of deciding the validity of reopening u/s.147 for A.Yrs. 2005-06 and 2006-07 and the alternate contention of the assessee regarding proportionate deduction u/s.80IB(10) for A.Yrs. 2005-06 to 2007-08 respectively. 3. So far as the issue relating to reopening of assessments for A.Yrs. 2005-06 and 2006-07 are concerned, the L .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

u/s.80IB(10) has been allowed in A.Y. 2004-05 in the assessment order made u/s.143(3). (c) No new tangible material has come in possession of the AO to reopen these completed assessments although made u/s.143(1). (d) Even the notice dated 12-11-2007 of the Pune Municipal Corporation cannot be considered as new material for the obvious reason that in the said notice the Pune Municipal Corporation has confirmed that the construction has been completed and the flats are under occupation. 4. He sub .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

010 order dated 07-10-2011. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand submitted that after completion of the assessment for A.Y. 2004-05 certain facts came to the notice of the AO which led him to initiate reassessment proceedings u/s.147/148. He submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings for A.Y.2007-08 the AO made enquiries with the local authority, i.e. Pune Municipal Corporation vide her letter dated 19-06-2008. In response to the said enquiry, the Deputy City .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pletion certificate for D7 building has not been given by the Pune Municipal Corporation. Further, the Pune Municipal Corporation vide letter No. BCO/3579 dated 12-11-2007 issued a notice to the assessee directing him to stop construction of the project due to certain ambiguity in ULC. Therefore, the AO had sufficient tangible materials for issue of notice u/s.148 by reopening the assessment u/s.147. Further, the assessments for A.Yrs. 2005-06 and 2006-07 were completed u/s.143(1). There was no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

with a wrong PAN Number. Therefore, the return was not readily traceable by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. He accordingly submitted that the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO being in accordance with law, the same should be upheld. 7. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the order of the AO and CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. From the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee as well as on perusal of the materia .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fore, tangible material has come in the hands of the Assessing Officer during A.Y. 2007-08 for which remedial measures were taken by the Assessing Officer for A.Yrs. 2005-06 and 2006-07 by reopening of the assessments. 8. As regards the argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that no reasons are recorded for issue of notice u/s.148 for both these assessment years, we find from the perusal of the order sheet entries that the reasons recorded by the AO are sufficient for reopening of the asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

idered opinion that the reopening of the assessments by the AO is valid. The grounds raised by the assessee on this issue for A.yrs. 2005-06 & 2006-07 are accordingly dismissed. 9. So far as the second issue is concerned, i.e. non consideration of the alternate ground relating to pro-rata deduction for A.Yrs. 2005-06 to 2007-08, we have held in the succeeding paragraphs that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of the entire housing project. Therefore, the above iss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0IB(10) of the I. T. Act. The AO disallowed the claim made u/s.80IB(10) on the ground that the assessee has not fulfilled the conditions laid down in the provisions of section 80IB(10). The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. On further appeal filed by the assessee the Tribunal vide order dated 31-03-2011 restored the issue of allowability of deduction u/s.80IB(10) to the file of the AO with a direction to examine the assessee s claim in the l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

application. The assessee has completed the entire project and part completion certificate for building Nos. D1 to D6 are already issued by PMC. The completion certificate for building No. D7 is awaited. It was submitted that the alleged major problem relating to ULC matter has been found to be incorrect and not at all in existence due to the order of the Hon ble High Court which quashed the initiation of revisional proceedings u/s.34. 12. So far as the objection of the AO that the decision of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dings and not on merits. 5.2 It is clear that the PMC raised its objection and much beyond the stipulated period of 21 days from the receipt of the application for the completion certificate and thus fulfils the condition laid down in rule 7.7 of the Development Control (DC) Rules of the PMC, as far the time limit is concerned. However the objection raised by the PMC vide letter dated 25.10.2007 was a major objection whereby the notice for stopping the construction was given. 5.3 It is a fact th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rs are members. It is in this context that the assessee's role in the Housing project' is required to be seen and examined. In view of the same, it is clear that the objection though raised late by the PMC is a major one and hence is clearly distinguishable from the objections of a minor nature raised in the case of M/s. Satish Bora and Associates. 5.4 As per the provisions of see 80 IB(10), in order to allow the claim, one of the prime conditions is that the construction in respect of w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n certificate has been granted to the said project. However, subsequently they informed that only part completion certificate i.e. in respect of buildings D-l to D-6 have been issued by them. Further, the assessee has also admitted vide his letter dated 07 12/2009 the fact that completion certificate has been issued in respect of six out of seven buildings only and the same has not been issued by the local authority for the seventh building. It is very much clear from PMC s letter dated 05/11/20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

inal completion certificate to the assessee till the date of passing this order. The letter dated 05.11.2012 from the PMC clearly states that the proceeding in respect of issue of final completion is still on. As such the assessee has violated the provisions stipulated in Explanation(ii) to section 80IB(10)(a) of the Act. 5.5 The tax incentive by way of deduction u/s. 80IB(10) is predominantly for the purpose of augmenting affordable dwelling units; not withstanding Legislature's unambiguous .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ets defeated. The provision of section 80IB(10) is a beneficial provision to the assessee. However, the conditions stipulated for getting the deduction needs to be fulfilled strictly. In the present case, though the assessee fulfills the other requisite conditions, the condition regarding the completion of the project within the stipulated period, may be due to some technical reasons, has not been fulfilled by the assessee and therefore the assessee's claim for deduction u/s.. 80IB(10) fails .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nsideration is hereby disallowed. 14. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) granted the pro-rata deduction, i.e. allowed the claim of deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of Building Nos. D1 to D6. He however denied the claim of deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of Building No. D7. The relevant observation of the Ld. CIT(A) at para 4.6 to 5 of the order read as under 4.6. I have considered the submissions of the appellant and the contention of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the claim for deduction u/s 80IB( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

addressed to the Assessing Officer stated in response to specific question as to whether a completion certificate had been issued in response to the application made by the assessee, that "the proceedings in respect of issue of completion certificate in respect of building no. 07 is in progress." The Assessing Officer relied upon this observation of PMC to hold that the completion certificate from the local authority as required under the Income Tax Act had not been granted to the app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

possibility of razing down unauthorized construction thereon. The Assessing Officer also noted that the department had not accepted the decision of the ITAT, Pune in the case of Satish Bora and Associates and had filed a reference before the High Court in that case. 4.7 The appellant s submission is that the Assessing Officer has travelled beyond the confines prescribed by the ITAT in examining the facts to see if Satish Boar case is applicable. This submission is not found to be correct. In th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng provision of 21 days to put constraint upon PMC, we after detailed deliberation in preceding paragraphs have come to a conclusion that in case of small objections of PMC raised after expiry of deeming period of 21 days under Rule 7.7 of DC Rules under PMC, the date when the applicant acquired deeming sanction will be treated as the date of Completion (occupancy) Certificate to meet out the requirement of Explanation (ii) to Section 80IB(10)(a) of the Act. We have already discussed herein abov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.2007 was received almost a year later. This letter put an immediate halt to the construction activity being undertaken at the appellant s Sunder Sahawas project. As already stated above this letter of PMC was issued in view of the major violation relating to the FSI as well as irregular construction carried out on lands declared as surplus vacant land. However, the Bombay High Court has subsequently intervened and quashed the revisional order of the Collector u/s.34 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the misuse of ULC Provision by certain developers and the grant of FSI on surplus vacant lands by the revenue and municipal authority, this order of PMC has been quashed by higher Court following which the order has been vacated by PMC. 4.9. The facts stated above, make it clear that it is not a case of 'small objections' which have been spelt out by the ITAT in the Satish Bora case but relate to a major objection which has been consequently withdrawn by the municipal/local authority. At .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ingly, it is held that the Assessing Officer has correctly appreciated the caveats laid down in Satish Bora case after examining the factual aspects of the appellant's case. 4.10. The alternative contention of the appellant is that deduction u/s 80IB10) may be allowed in respect of the six buildings which are admittedly completed before 31.03.2008. Reliance has been placed on the following decisions of ITAT, Pune at Bombay High Court a) M/s. Vandana Properties ITA No. 3633 of 2009 Bombay Hig .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

High Court and ITAT, Pune and following the precedent of judicial discipline, the alternate contention of the appellant that deduction u/s.80IB(10) should be allowed in respect of the 06 buildings which were admittedly completed before 31.03.2008, is found acceptable. Accordingly, ground No.1 to 3 are held to be partly allowed. 5. Unnumbered ground of appeal is a residual ground and says that appellant be allowed to add, amend, alter or delete any ground of appeal at the time of appellate proce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appreciating the fact that there has not been any new tangible material possessed by the AO justifying the reopening of the assessment. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice to above ground, the CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the claim made u/s.80IB(10) for the entire housing project. The above grounds of appeal may kindly be allowed to be altered, modified, amended, etc in the interest of natural justice. Grounds by Revenue : 1. The order of the Ld. Commi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(Appeals) erred on facts and in law, in allowing the deduction u/s 80IB(10) when the assessee had completed only six building out of 7 building, the plan was approved by Local Authority for 7 buildings thus the assessee violated the provision of sub section (ii) of clause (a) to section 80IB(10) of the Act, 1961. 4. For these and such above other grounds as may be urged at the time of the hearing, the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) may be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer be restored .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

principle held that the profit in respect of the entire housing project including the 7th building is eligible for deduction u/s.80IB(10). The Hon ble Tribunal, however, required the AO to verify the correctness of the additional evidences filed before the Tribunal. The decision of the Tribunal was misconstrued by the AO who again confirmed the disallowance of deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of the entire housing project. Since the assessee had produced the occupancy certificate from the Pune .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ese are under occupation. He submitted that since construction of all the buildings have been completed the assessee should be allowed the deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of the profits of the entire project for all the 3 assessment years. 17. He further submitted that the project has been sanctioned on 22-12-2003, i.e. prior to 01-04-2005. Referring to the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. CHD Developers Ltd. reported in 362 ITR 177 he submitted that the Hon ble High .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ubmitted that the Tribunal following the above decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court has held that since the date of commencement of the project in that case is admittedly 16-07-2002, therefore, the amendment w.e.f. 01-04-2005 requiring the certificate of completion of project within 4 years of approval is not applicable to the project approved prior to that date. It was accordingly held that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the I. T. Act. 18. Again, referring to the de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ivil Application filed by the asssessee. He submitted that the Pune Municipal Corporation by its letter dated 09-09-2010 vacated the notice dated 12-11-2007 suggesting very clearly that even the socalled discrepancy never existed on the said date. He submitted that in the instant case the licensed architect filed the application dated 17-05-2006 along with the completion certificate for providing occupancy certificate for all the 7 buildings. The PMC granted occupancy certificate on 16-12-2006 f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

19. The Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the AO. He submitted that since the assessee has not produced the completion certificate for the Building No. D7, therefore, in view of the provisions of section 80IB(10) the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s.80IB(10) for the entire project. 20. As regards the order of the CIT(A) giving pro-rata deduction in respect of 6 buildings is concerned he submitted that there is no concept of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and submitted that the grounds raised by the assessee be dismissed and the grounds raised by the revenue be accepted. 21. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the Paper Book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find in the instant the assessee carried out construction of a housing project called Sundar Sahavas and claimed deduction u/s.80IB(10) of the Act with respect t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uthority had issued a notice to the assessee directing him not to carry out further construction work on the project as there was certain ambiguities under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, therefore, the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of deduction u/s.80IB(10). According to the AO, as per Explanation (ii) to section 80IB(10) the date of completion of the housing project shall be the date on which the completion certificate in respect of such housing project is issued by the local authority. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Satish Bora and Associates (Supra) is concerned, the AO held that since the department is in appeal before the Hon ble High Court, therefore, the same cannot be followed. 22. We find in appeal the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of prorata deduction in respect of the 6 buildings which were admittedly completed before 31-03-2008. While doing so, he relied on various decisions of the Tribunal and the decision of the Hon ble High Court in the case of M/s. Van .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

also the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that in view of the decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CHD Developers Ltd. (Supra) the assessee is not required to produce the completion certificate to avail the deduction u/s.80IB(10) in respect of a housing project which has been approved prior to 01-04-2005. 23. We find merit in the above argument of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. Admittedly, the project has been sanctioned by the local authority on 22-12-2003 v .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ldings are constructed and are under occupation. The letter issued by PMC on 12-11-2007 directing the assessee to stop the construction work has been vacated by the Hon ble Bombay High Court vide order dated 30-06-2010. The relevant observation of the Hon ble High Court at para 3 and 4 reads as under 3. In so far as challenge to the Revisional order on aforesaid grounds of inordinate delay and the levy of penalty is concerned, the said issue is no more res-integra and is concluded by a judgment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

entioned in the ready reckoner for regularizing the construction on the surplus vacant land. 4. Since in the instant case revisional proceedings were initiated after a period of about five years, for the view that the Division Bench of this Court has taken in the judgment (Supra), the above petition is required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). Rule is accordingly made absolute in the above terms. Therefore, now the question that arises is as to whether wher .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issue had come up before the Tribunal in the case of System Enterprises vide ITA No.1123/PN/2013 order dated 28-08-2014 for A.Y. 2009-10. The Tribunal following the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CHD Developers Ltd.(Supra) and the decision of Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s Ittina Properties Pvt. Ltd. vide ITA No.556/PN/2013 and batch of other appeals order dated 15-07-2014 has held that amendment w.e.f. 01- 04-2005 required completion certificate of project .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Assessing Officer in the instant case denied the benefit of deduction u/s.80IB(10) on 4 counts (a) the housing project last sanctioned was for the construction of 65 units which has not been completed in the stipulated time frame, (b) the built up area of 2 row houses 1 & 7 are more than 1500 sq.ft. each (c) the housing project was required to be completed in totality and not individual flats and (d) the condition laid down in section (a) and (b) of 80IB(10) of the Act was not fulfilled. 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

terrace, balcony and projections etc., and therefore the 2 units fulfil conditions prescribed u/s.80IB(10)(14)(a) of the I. T. Act. The above observations of the Ld. CIT(A) are not challenged by the Revenue and therefore it has attained finality and therefore we are not concerned with the above objections of the Assessing Officer. 10.2 The other ground on which the Assessing Officer based his rejection of deduction u/s.80IB(10) is that the assessee has not been able to obtain the requisite compl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e according to both of them the project should have been completed before 31-03-2008. 10.3 We find the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CHD Developers Ltd. (Supra) has observed as under (Short Notes) Section 80-IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, before substitution by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 allowed a hundred per cent, deduction of the profits in the case of an undertaking developing and building housing projects approved before March 31, 2005, by a local authority. By the Finance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion certificate in respect of such housing project is issued by the local authority. The assessee, a real estate developer, obtained approval for a housing project on March 16, 2005, from the Development Authority. It completed the project in 2008 and by letter dated November 5, 2008 applied to the competent authority for the issue of the completion certificate. For the assessment year 2007-08, its claim to deduction under section 80-IB(10) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was denied inter alia, on t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lfil the conditions which were not in existence at the relevant point of time or made compulsory by amendment in the Act from the future date. Since the assessee was to complete the project on or before March 31, 2009, and a request was duly made with the competent authority on November 5, 2008, mentioning that the project had been completed and the completion certificate may be issued and if the certificate was not issued by the competent authority the assessee should not be penalised therefore .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appeal, that the approval for the project was given by the Development Authority on March 16, 2005. Clearly the approval related to the period prior to 2005, i.e., before the amendment, which insisted on issuance of the completion certificate by the end of the fouryear period, was brought into force. The application of such stringent conditions, which are left to an independent body such as the local authority who is to issue the completion certificate, would have led to not only hardship but .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

under Sec. 80 IB. The said provision came on the statute book by Finance Act 2004, with effect from 1/4/2005. The plan which is sanctioned in this case is of 16/3/2004 i.e., prior to the said provision coming into force. This court in more than one case has held that the said provision is prospective in nature and it has no application to house products which was approved by the local authority prior to 1/4/2005. In that view of the matter, the benefit under Sec. 80 IB cannot be denied to the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd the said questions of law are answered in the sense that the said provision has no application to the facts of this case . 10.5 Since the date of the commencement of the project in the instant case is admittedly 16-07-2002 as held by the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A), therefore, respectfully following the decisions cited (Supra) it has to be held that amendment w.e.f. 01-04-2005 requiring certificate of completion of project within 4 years of approval is not applicable to the projec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Forum: Duty Drawback & Input Credit - under GST

Forum: Input tax credit

Notification: Levy of anti dumping duty on New/unused pneumatic radial tyres with or without tubes and/or flap of rubber (including tubeless tyres) having normal rim dia code above 16 originating in, or exported from China PR

Highlight: Cenvat credit availed on Club Membership for the Director is not admissible as it cannot be said to be remotely connected with the activity of manufacture

Circular: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg.

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Manpower Service provider

News: Jaitley asks biz not to wait till last day to file GST returns

Circular: Implementing Electronic Sealing for containers by exporters under self-sealing procedure prescribed by Circular 26/2017-Cus dated 1st July, 2017 and Circular 36/2017 dated 28 th August, 2017. — reg.

Forum: Construction of single unit bungalow

Forum: Input credit of gst paid on urd

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: ‘DUTY DRAWBACK’ CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH ‘REBATE OF DUTY’

Highlight: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

News: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

Highlight: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

Highlight: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Non-payment of service tax - maintenance and repair charges - appellants had knowingly and deliberately shown the repair charges as job work charges to mislead about their taxability - demand confirmed.

Highlight: BAS - execution of the project of smart card for vehicle registration – implementing the SOC-VRC project - The fact that the Government has outsourced some part of the work and paid certain consideration for such outsourced work, does not make the activity subject to service tax.

News: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg. - Trade Notice

Highlight: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg. - Various amendments are made in Chapter-4 of Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020.

Circular: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg.

Highlight: Sharing of expenses - BAS - promotion of business of group companies - sharing of expenditure for common facilities cannot be treated as service by one to another in such arrangement.

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

Circular: Certain Clarifications sought on Construction Services provided in the Real Estate Sector – reg.

News: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

News: Fast-track GST refund, else ₹ 65K cr may be stuck: Exporters

Highlight: It is open to the Settlement Commission to use best judgment in arrival of the figure. Nonetheless it has to explain the manner in which the best judgment figure has been arrived at by the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - advances given to societies - in the absence of legal right of the assessee in the said society the amount advanced cannot be treated as deemed income.

Highlight: When electrical installations are treated as plant and machinery the depreciation has to be allowed @ 25% as per provisions contained u/s 32

TMI Note: Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassment to the honest tax payers

Highlight: Option to avail composition scheme under GST by electronically filing an intimation in FORM GST CMP-02 and FORM GST ITC-03 upto 30-9-2017 - See Rule 3(3A)

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply for the purposes of computing exemption u/s 11 to 13.

Highlight: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability - CBDT issues draft notification

TMI Note: Certain ICDS provisions are inconsistent with judicial precedents. Whether these judicial precedents would prevail over ICDS.

Highlight: Provisions of ICDS shall prevail w.e.f. AY 2017-18 to the transactional issues dealt therein over earlier judicial pronouncements.

News: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability

TMI Note: In case of conflict between ICDS and other specific provisions of the Income-tax rules, 1962 governing taxation of income like rules 9A, 9B etc. of the Rules, which provisions shall prevail.

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply to computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act or Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act.

TMI Note: Where a term has not been defined under ICDS, nor under the Act, but has different interpretations given to it by the courts in tax cases, and in ICAI Accounting Standards, which interpretation would prevail while interpreting ICDS.

TMI Note: Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA).

TMI Note: In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, which would prevail over the other.

TMI Note: ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific disclosures. Where is the taxpayer required to make such disclosures specified in ICDS.

Notification: Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) - New ICDS to be effective from AY 2017-18

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Highlight: GST - Detention of goods under transport - discrepancy in documents - the statutory provisions provide a mechanism for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication - HC

Highlight: Reassessment - first few paragraphs of the assessment order dealt with objections and disposed of accordingly - Unfortunately, the manner in which the AO has decided the issue is wholly unsustainable in law - HC

Highlight: Business expenditure u/s 37 - liquidated damage - breach of contract terms - Expenditure was not incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law - cannot be disallowed - HC



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version