Join our free webinar on July 4th at 4:00 PM to gain insights into the dematerialization of securities and recent amendments. Register now for key updates.
Join our free webinar on July 7 at 5 PM for insights into 10 recent High Court income tax judgments favoring assessees. Expert analysis by CA Dipak Dama.
The taxpayer was a banking company. In the current appeal, the Revenue’s grievance was that the CIT(A) had erred in directing that the written back ”provision of bad-debts” was not taxable as ”business income” especial y when a deduction of a sum was already al owed under Section 36(1) (vi a). The AO in the assessment order held that such write off of the provision for bad and doubtful debts was allowed as deduction in the previous years and therefore the current write back should be taxable. The CIT(A), while deciding the case before him, held that in the absence of any specific provision in the Act, an amount of liability written back cannot be taxed as income.
The taxpayer was a wholly owned subsidiary of Denso Thermal Systems, Italy. The taxpayer was engaged in the business of manufacturing certain automobile products and selling the same in India and abroad. For the impugned assessment year, the taxpayer claimed that the royalty paid to its parent company as revenue expenditure. After perusing the details called for, the AO, relying on the decision of CIT vs. Southern Switchgear Ltd. 148 ITR 272 (Mad) held 25% of the royalty claimed as capital expenditure and disallowed the same.
The applicant is a US-based manufacturer engaged in manufacturing of engineering goods and is also an R&D-based service provider. It entered a cost al ocation agreement with its India-based group company. The applicant raises invoices on the Indian group company for services rendered based on the formula given in the agreement. The question before the Authority for Advance Ruling was: “Whether payments made for availing services listed out in the agreement are taxable in India and if taxable whether it is liable to TDS under Section 195 of the Act?”
The taxpayer was a company incorporated under Hong Kong laws. It filed its return of income declaring total income of INR196 million. AO noticed that the taxpayer had not offered for tax the amount received toward reimbursement of expenses, which included custom duty and accordingly the income was assessed at INR197.2 million. Aggrieved by the same, the taxpayer filed an appeal before the CIT(A).
Over 30,000 tax litigations are pending in the Income Tax Appelate Tribunals across the country, though most of these appeals are filed by the tax department and not the assessees, Minister of State for Finance S S Palanimanickam said in the Lok Sabha today. ITATs accross the country have 30,303 cases pending till June 30 this year of which more than 77 per cent are those appeals filed by the tax department, Palanimanickam informed the lower house.
Notification No. 43/2009-Service Tax Whereas the Central Government is satisfied that a practice was generally prevalent regarding levy of service tax ( including non-levy thereof ), under section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 ( 32 of 1994) (hereinafter referred to as the Finance Act), on taxable service namely ‘business auxiliary services’ specified in sub-clause (zzb) of clause 105 of section 65 of the Finance Act provided by a person ( hereinafter called the ‘service provider’) to any other person ( hereinafter called the ‘service receiver’) during the course of manufacture or processing of alcoholic beverages by the service provider, for or on behalf of the service receiver, and that such services being a taxable service were liable to service tax under the said sub-clause (zzb) of clause 105 of section 65 of the Finance Act with effect from 1 st day of September 2009, which was not being levied according to the said practice during the period commencing from the 1 st day of September, 2009 and ending with the 22nd day of September, 2009;
Payment of salary outside India to employees of a foreign company who are on secondment to an office, branch, subsidiary or joint venture in India (Indian entity) of the foreign company. The remittance of salary received by foreign nationals whilst resident in India who are employees of Indian companies.
The question whether there should be a system of rotation of statutory auditors introduced to avoid repetition of Satyam episode has been raised in some quarters. In the past, the Government had tried to introduce this system by proposing amendments in the Companies Act on two occasions. However, these amendments could not be implemented as the Parliamentary Committees which examined these proposal rejected them in view of the strong protests from our members and the Institute. Investigations about the role of auditors in the Satyam episode are in progress. The reasons for the audit failure are not ascertained and, therefore, it would be premature to make this episode as illustrative. No definite conclusions can be drawn at this stage and it cannot be said that such episode will not be repeated if we introduce the system of rotation of statutory auditors through any legislation. It is reported that no developed country in the world has introduced this system.
Till today the law on the subject of repairing and maintenance of roads and other infrastructural facilities was clear in the minds of all stakeholders (barring a few service tax commissionerates). There was this discussion that maintenance and/or repairing of roads may be a taxable activity, but a conclusive view came across from most corners that no such taxing is possible because the law itself was clear enough.
The Government has been rightly concerned about the component of black money in real estate transactions and consequent evasion of tax. With a view to curb the said menace and to tax the unaccounted money, the Government has time and again made amendments in the Income-tax Act (Act) by introducing different provisions to tackle the issue.
