An order of assessment in case of ICICI bank Ltd (ICICI) was passed in March 1999 u/s 143(3) wherein deduction claimed u/s Section 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) and in respect of foreign exchange rate difference was allowed. The first reassessment was carried out in February 2000 for reworking a deduction under Sec 80M. Thereafter, a second reassessment was carried out in March 2001 for reworking of the deduction under Section 36(1)(viii). In March 2003, the Commissioner u/s 263 sought to revise assessment to disallow deduction u/s 36(1 )(vii) and 36(1 )(viia) and in respect of foreign exchange rate difference.
HC held that the benefit of Sec 80IB was not available where the assessee had not applied for Factory License before April 1st 2004. How¬ever, HC also clarified that in other cases where the assessee had applied for Factory License before April 1st 2004 but was granted the same later, deduction shall be allowable and such cases shall be treated as mere technical default.
The Tribunal referred to CBDT circular No. 8/2005, dtd. 29.08.2005 and opined that once fringe benefit tax is levied on expenses incurred, it follows that the same are treated as fringe benefits provided by the assessee as employer to its employees and the same have to be appropriately allowed as expenses incurred wholly and exclusively incurred by the assessee for the purpose of its business.
HC, ruling in favour of the assessee held that it was eligible to set off a loss incurred in tax holiday unit against the income arising from other units, under the same head of ‘profits and gains of business or profession’. HC observed that there was no specific prohibition in Sec 10B for such setting off of a loss. Under Sec 70, the assessee was eligible to set off loss from one source against income from any other source under the same head of income.
Mumbai Bench of ITAT observed that the term loan from IDBI was borrowed by the assessee for the purpose of acquiring a capital asset. Accordingly, ITAT held that the waiver of loan from IDBI was a capital receipt and not taxable u/s 28(iv) or 41(1). ITAT observed that the remission or reduction of liability, which is created on capital account, cannot to our mind result in a revenue receipt making it taxable u/s 28(iv) or 41(1) of the Act and that the waiver of such term loan does not constitute business and the waiver can not be held as income u/s.28(iv) or cessation of liability u/s 41(1).
High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. We say so for the reason, that, whether a sale originating in a State is an inter-state sale or not is essentially a question of fact to be determined by the authorities under the Act, since it involves the application of the provisions of Sections 3, 5, 6 and 9(i) of the Act to the facts established and hence, it will be a mixed question of law and fact. The facts requires to be brought to the notice of the Assessing Authority by the appellants and it is for the assessing authority to come to a conclusion, based on those facts whether a particular transaction is intra-state sales which is exigible to the taxes under the VAT Act or inter-state sales, as envisaged under Section 3 of the Act read with Section 6 of the charging provisions therein. It is after such adjudication, the matter can travel from one stage to the other as provided under the Act.
Procedure of obtaining Registration Certificate (RC) was notified in Notification No. 63 (RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 04.08.2011 and modified by Notification No. 74 (RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 12.08.2011. Time to export (validity of RC) was “30 days from issue of RC”. Because of prohibition imposed by Notification No. 102 (RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 05.03.2012, this time limit may require to be extended in respect of those RCs, that were valid as on 05.03.2012 and for which LEOs are yet to be issued & exports completed. All RCs would need to be submitted to DGFT for scrutiny and revalidation. Exports can be effected only after RCs are revalidated.
How can the change in address or details on the basis of which TAN was allotted be communicated to Income Tax Department? Any change or corrections in the data associated with the TAN, should be communicated to ITD by filing up ‘Form for Changes or Correction in TAN data for TAN allotted’ alongwith the necessary fees at any of the TINFCs, or at NSDL-TIN website.
You can apply for TAN online at the NSDL-TIN website. You can then fill and submit the form online. Once you click on button ‘submit’, an acknowledgment containing a unique 14 digit acknowledgment number is generated on the screen. You should print this acknowledgment, sign it and despatch it to NSDL at the address mentioned on NSDL-TIN website along with the processing fee which is 55 + service tax (as applicable). Payment can be made by DD/cheque, payable at par in Mumbai, favouring NSDL-TIN or by Credit card / Debit card or Net banking.
Duplicate TAN is a TAN which has been inadvertently obtained by a person who is responsible for deducting/collecting tax and who already has a TAN allotted to him. It is illegal to possess or use more than one TAN. Different branches/divisions of an entity may, however, have separate TANs. In case duplicate TANs have been allotted, the TAN which has been used regularly should be continued to be used. The other TAN/s should be surrendered for cancellation using ‘Form for Changes or Correction in TAN’ which can be downloaded from NSDL-TIN website or may be procured from TIN-FCs or other vendors.
