Data Inconsistency issues which need to be avoided for accurate processing. 1. Set off of brought forward loss claimed, but Schedules BFLA / CFL not filled ……. Year of loss not indicated in CFL. 2. Profit before tax (at serial No. 43 of Sch. P & L Account) differs from Profit from business at serial 1 of Sch. B P 3. Depreciation claimed in Sch. BP – but Sch. DEP / DPM / DOA not filled in / Depreciation debited in Sch. P & L Account not added back in Sl. 11 of Sch. BP. 4. Special benefit for female claimed – Gender in PAN database is Male.
[r 1] In this Article we have dealt with Question related to income Tax Refund i.e. 1) Necessary data necessities required in order to get the Refund through Cheque 2) Basic data required all the validations to get the Refund through ECS? 3) What should I do, if my Refund is failed due to change in my Communication Address? 4) Within how many days I will get my refund after updating the new address in the E-Portal? 5) What should I do, if my Refund is failed due to error in Ac number or Change in the Ac details? 6) Mandatory points to be noted while sending a Response Sheet.
In order to give an opportunity to the defaulting companies in the state of Jammu & Kashmir to enable them to make their default good by filing such belated documents and to become a regular compliant in future, the Ministry, in exercise of the powers under Section 611(2) and 637B (b) of the Companies Act, 1956 has decided to introduce a Special Scheme namely, Company Law Settlement Scheme (Jammu & Kashmir), 2012
The said chapter nowhere provides that method of accounting for the purpose of ascertaining net profit should be the only income from business alone and not from other sources. Section 29 provides how the income from profits and gains of business or profession should be computed and this has to be done as provided under Section 30 to 43D. By virtue of Section 5 of the said Act that total incomes of any previous years includes all income from whatever source derived. Thus for the purpose of Section 40(b)(v) read with Explanation there cannot be separate method of accounting for ascertaining net profit and/or book-profit.
Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the beneficial ownership of the shares vested with Copal Jersey and that ownership should determine the applicatory law. India did not have a treaty with Jersey and hence on the application of the Income-tax Act, the capital gains are taxable in India. He pointed out that there was no dispute that the gains were taxable under the Act.
[a] The first test is whether the initial acquisition of the subject matter of transaction was with the intention of dealing in the item, or with a view to finding an investment. If the transaction, since the inception, appears to be impressed with the character of a commercial transaction entered into with a view to earn profit, it would furnish a valuable guideline.
It can be observed from the earlier parts of the TPO’s order that he confined himself only to IT/ITES for the purposes of bench marking. In such a case, there could have been no question of the TPO embarking upon the figures in relation to non-IT/ITES segments of some of the comparable cases as chosen by him. Apart from making a general statement that the TPO also considered the figures from non-IT/ITES segments in some of the comparable cases, no material has been placed on record to substantiate this argument.
1. Salary income shown at higher figure than entered – In Salary Schedule higher figure is reported under Gross salary which should be excluding Exempt income (such as transport allowance etc). Taxpayer may have mentioned Transport allowance in Exempt Income and may have deducted the same to arrive at a lower net figure in the final calculation. However, the Exempt income is to be mentioned only for reporting purposes and should not be used in any calculation.
The High Court has failed to appreciate that while charging interest from the assessees, the Department first adjusts the amount paid towards interest so that the principal amount of tax payable remain outstanding and they are entitled to charge interest till the entire outstanding is paid. But when it comes to granting of interest on refund of taxes, the refunds are first adjusted towards the taxes and then the balance towards interest. Hence, as per the stand that the Department takes they are liable to pay interest only up to the date of refund of tax while they take the benefit of assessees funds by delaying the payment of interest on refunds without incurring any further liability to pay interest,. This stand taken by the respondents is discriminatory in natrure and thereby causing great prejudice to the lakhs and lakhs of assessees.
Reimbursement of custom duty paid by the assessee could not form part of amount for the purpose of deemed profits u/s 44BB unlike the other amounts received towards reimbursement. Following the view in this decision, Mumbai Bench in their decision in Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines(supra)held that service tax being a statutory liability, would not involve any element of profit and accordingly, the same could not be included in the total receipts for determining the presumptive income.
