It has been represented to the Board that in view of the difficulties faced by persons migrating from Burma to India, it may not be possible for a migrant from that country to lead the evidence necessary to prove his claim that a particular sum of money has been brought over by him from that country. 2. The Board consider that the case of bona fide migrants from Burma should be dealt with in a sympathetic manner. In their cases production of direct or documentary evidence in the shape of transfer through banks, hundies, etc., in support of remittance from Burma need not be insisted upon. However, with a view to ensure that unscrupulous persons do not abuse the concessions, the ITOs should ensure the satisfaction of the following conditions before accepting a claim of remittance from
On a representation made by the Gujarat Chamber of Commerce, the matter has been reconsidered by the Board in consultation with the Ministry of Law. Under section 271(1)(i) the penalty is to be 2 per cent of the tax, if any, payable by the assessee
On a representation made by the Gujarat Chamber of Commerce, the matter has been reconsidered by the Board in consultation with the Ministry of Law. Under s. 271(l)(a) of the IT Act, 1961, the penalty is to be 2 per cent of the tax, if any, payable by the assessee.
The decision of the Supreme Court was that where the sale was of the concern as a whole and a slump price was paid, no portion of this price was attributable to the stock-in-trade and, therefore, it was not possible to hold that there was a profit other than what resulted from the appreciation of capital. It follows, therefore, that where a business is sold as a going concern, the excess may not be a business profit, but will be capital gain chargeable to tax
All salaried persons having taxable income as per annual returns under section 206 should be taken on the G.I.R. However notices under section 139(2) or 147 are to be issued only to those persons who have not paid the tax correctly or who are believed to be having some source of income besides salary
In Board Circular No. 55 of 1941, it was stated that interest charged to a partner on his overdrawn account should not be included in the total income of the firm. It was further stated that where it appears that the capital borrowed for the purpose of business was partly diverted towards over-drawn account, the correct procedure would be to disallow the proportionate share of the interest payable on this capital in computing the income of the firm.
The decision of the Supreme Court was that where the sale was of the concern as a whole and a lump price was paid, no portion of this price was attributable to the stock-in-trade and therefore it was not possible to hold that there was a profit other than what resulted from the appreciation of capital.
