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 →

Prayer Housing LLP (Successor of Prayer Housing Pvt. Ltd.) Versus Add. CIT-8 (2) , Mumbai

Penalty levied u/s 271D - violation of the provisions of sec. 269SS - period of limitation - Held that:- We are of the view that the intimation given by the AO cannot be considered to be initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 271D of the Act. Further, as stated earlier, the penalty proceedings can be said to have been initiated only when the notice relating to the same are issued to the assessee. Accordingly we agree with the view of the tax authorities that the penalty was initiated in the instan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. Thus the penalty u/s 271D of the Act shall not be levieble, if the assessee shows that there was a reasonable cause for accepting the loan or deposit by way of cash. We notice that the assessee has only contended before the tax authorities that the impugned amount was received as advance towards sale of flat. Before us, the assessee has raised some more contentions, which were not examined by the tax authorities. With regard to the observatio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

w that this issue requires fresh examination. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) and restore the same to the file of the Addl. Commissioner with the direction to examine this issue afresh by considering various contentions that may be raised by the assessee. - Decided partly in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 2007/Mum/2011 - Dated:- 1-6-2016 - Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Ramlal Negi (JM) For The Assessee : Shri D.V. Lakhani For The Department : Shri Amit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

loan of ₹ 16.00 lakhs by way of cash and the same has violated the provisions of sec. 269SS of the Act. Accordingly he intimated the same to the Addl. Commissioner of Income tax on 31.12.2008. Subsequently, the Addl. CIT initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act by issuing notice on 11.06.2009. Another notice was also issued on 17.08.2009. The penalty order was finally passed on 21.10.2009. 3. The assessee submitted that the amount of ₹ 16.00 lakhs was received from its direc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

held company should not be treated as loan or deposit covered by sec. 269SS of the Act. The assessee also contended that the proceeding is barred by limitation also. 4. The Addl. CIT held that the proceedings are not barred by limitation. The Addl. CIT noticed that the above said amount of ₹ 16.00 lakhs was shown as Unsecured loans in its Balance Sheet. Further the alleged receipt of advance towards sale of flat was in respect of a project, for which neither the land has been purchased nor .....

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 Ld CIT(A) held that the Addl. CIT was justified in levying the penalty u/s 269SS of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal before us. 6. The first issue relates to the limitation. The contention of the assessee is that the assessing officer has intimated the Addl CIT about the violation of provisions of sec. 269SS of the Act on 31.12.2008 and hence the limitation period should be counted from that date. In this regard, the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision rendered in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not entitled to initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act. Hence the AO has intimated about the violation of the provisions of sec. 269SS of the Act on 31.12.2008. It is the only Addl. Commissioner, being a competent authority, has issued notice u/s 271D of the Act for the first time on 11-06-2009. The provisions of sec. 275(1)(c) of the Act prescribe the time limit for completion of the penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act and the same reads as under:- 275(1) No order imposing a penal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

m the date on which action for imposition of penalty has been initiated. 8. According to the assessee, the intimation given by the AO to the Addl. CIT about the impugned violation would amount to initiation of action for imposition of penalty. We are unable to agree with the same. The authority prescribed under the Act for imposition of penalty is not the assessing officer. Further the assessing officer has only intimated about the violation to the Addl CIT on 31.12.2008. The Addl. CIT, under 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

06.2009. The time limit for completion of the penalty proceedings as per sec. 275(1)(c) shall be either 31.3.2010 or 31.12.2009, whichever expires later. Accordingly, in the instant case, the time limit shall expire on 31.3.2010. In the instant case, the penalty order has been passed on 21.10.2009 and hence we are of the view that the same is not barred by limitation. In the case relied upon by the assessee, we notice that the Hon ble High Court was referring to the initiation of proceedings by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

om director is not treated as deposit under Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 1975. (c) Even though the amount received from Gautam PateL (director) as advance towards sale of flats as Unsecured loans in the Balance Sheet, the books of account would show that the assessee has accounted for ₹ 16.00 lakhs separately, i.e., in the Balance sheet, both the accounts were grouped together. (d) Gautam Patel has acted in dual capacity, i.e., in his personal capacity when given advance to 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

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

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Forum: GST Invoice

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

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

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer



|| 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