Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Forum Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News What's New Calendar Imp. Links Database More...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

ACIT-16 (1) , Mumbai Versus M/s. P.N. Amersy (HUF)

Penalty u/s. 271 (1)(c) - whether amount received by the assessee from two parties for surrendering its rights in a property,taxable u/s. 55 (2)(a)? - Held that:- It is not the case of the AO that the stand taken by the assessee was totally against the provisions of the Act or that prima facie it was inadmissible. Maximum it could be said that there was difference of opinion. Thus, the claim made by the assessee was a legally plausible claim. It is a different issue that in the appellate proceed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the order of the FAA does not suffer from any legal infirmity. The cases, relied upon by the AR, also endorse the view taken by the FAA. So, confirming his order, we decide the effective ground of appeal in favour of the assessee - I.T.A. 2383/Mum/2014 - Dated:- 15-7-2016 - Sh. Rajendra, Accountant Member & Pawan Singh, Judicial Member For the Revenue : Ms. Radha Katyal Narang-DR For the Assessee : Shri Hiro Rai-AR ORDER .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

determining the income of the assessee at ₹ 3. 81 Crores. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that assessee had received a sum of ₹ 4. 55 Crores from Pyramid retail Ltd and ₹ 5 lakhs from Maneck Dawer for surrendering rights offer premises situated at MM Estate, that the premises was owned by a Trust, that it had leased the premises to Moonshot Investment Corporation who entered sublet the premises to the assessee by agreement dated 14/08/1969, that Pyramid Retail 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

ceedings u/s. 271(1)(c). The assessee agitated the issue before the First Appellate Authority (FAA), who dismiss the appeal filed by it. The AO gave one more opportunity to the assessee by issue a notice on 05/02/2013 and asked it as to why penalty should not levied. As per the AO, the assessee filed it an explanation and same was placed on record. After considering the submission of the assessee, the AO held that the issue had been upheld by the FAA, that the AO was right in invoking the provis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed in good faith, that it had disclosed the facts relating to the transaction in the return of income claiming the same was not taxable based on legal advice also relying on decisions of the High Court and the Tribunal, that the assessee s case was not of surrender of tenancy, that it was never a tenant-it was a mere licence holder, that the case was not covered by the provisions of section 55 (2), that the note was appended to the competition of income filed along with the return. After conside .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of the assessee for the purpose of evidence of penalty must be an acceptable explanation, that it should not be a fantastic or fanciful one. Referring to the case of Pfizer Ltd(19taxmanm. com75), he held that if the assessee entertained bona fide belief that the amount in question was not chargeable to tax and a disclosure was made penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) should not levied. He further observed that the assessee had placed all the material before the AO and the return of income as well as durin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

opinion given by a Supreme Court advocate, that a note was appended to the return of income, that it could not be said that assessee had not provided all the material facts for computing the income, that it could not also be said that the assessee could not have entertained the bona fide belief that the said sum was not exigible to tax. Relying upon the judgment of Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. , he deleted the penalty imposed by the AO. 4. Before us, the Departmental Representative(DR) argue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

isions of sec. 55(2)(a) of the act were not applicable, that it was not a case of tenancy by it was a matter of transfer of rights, that it was a debatable issue, that rejection of a legal claim would not result in automatic levy of concealment penalty. He relied upon the cases of Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (322 ITR 158); S. M. Constructions (233 taxman 263);Petals Engineers (P) Ltd. (264 CTR 577);Nalin P. Shah (ITXA(LOD)49 of 2013; Administrator of the Estate of Late Mr. E. F. Dinshaw (21 .....

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 AO held that amount received by the assessee was taxable u/s. 55 (2)(a)of the Act, that the FAA and the Tribunal upheld the addition made by the assessee in quantum appeals, that the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act, that the assessee had filed explanation before him during the penalty proceedings. We observe that the AO mentions that the assessee had filed submissions for not levying penalty, but what was the explanation has not been mentioned. He simply stated tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lment penalty. We find that said pre-requisite is missing in the present case. No judicial authority is required to be cited to hold that assessment and penalty proceedings are different and conclusion drawn during assessment may be relevant but not binding for levying penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. The purpose of assessment is to determine the amount of due taxes from an assessee, but penalty proceedings are initiated to compensate the State of revenue loss. So, a conclusion arrived during .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

  ↓     Latest Happening     ↓  

Forum: GST rates on mobile recharge business

Forum: Cess paid instead of SGST

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

Forum: import purchase

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 $

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input credit of gst paid on urd

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.

Forum: transfer of shares

Forum: Input tax credit

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.

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

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

Highlight: Valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - managing participation of clients in certain mela, fairs, promotional activities etc. - They are liable to service tax on the gross amount received - They cannot restrict their tax liability to only agency commission

Highlight: TDS liability - ITAT confirmed the liability - We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion - HC

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - sufficiency of material available with the AO to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment - bogus purchases - seller refused to respond - notice would not be interfered with - HC

Highlight: Exemption u/s 11 - education activities - transport and hostel facilities surplus cannot be considered as business income of the assessee society

News: Draft Notification for insertion of new rule 39A in the Income-tax Rules, 1962 comments and suggestions-reg.

Highlight: Genuineness of labour wages expenses, embroidery charges, fabrication expenses etc. - getting work done through small workmen who do not have any permanent place of residence - disallowance of ad hoc expenditure deleted.

Highlight: Project import - Since the goods were never used for the purpose for which it was imported, the actual user condition has been violated - Redemption fine and penalty imposed.

Highlight: Penalty u/s 112 (a) - CHA - Lack of due diligence and failure to take more precautions can not, by itself, bring in penal consequences

Highlight: Import of services - GST - The fact that those services were received outside India will not change the fact that the services have been paid for by the beneficiary appellant, who is located in India. - Demand confirmed.

Notification: SEZ for IT/ITES at Madhurwada Village, Visakhapatnam District in the State of Andhra Pradesh - denotified.

Highlight: Merely because payment is received in Indian rupee, it cannot be said that payment against export has not been received in convertible foreign exchange.

Highlight: Merely vehicle numbers was not mentioned on the invoices cannot be the reason to deny Cenvat Credit

Highlight: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 120A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 - Circular

Circular: Extension of time limit for submitting the declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1 under rule 120A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017



|| 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