E-assessment Personal hearing & Principles of Natural Justice

2 Comments

1. SRSUBRAMANIAN says:

   In the case of property apartment
   Pocession taken, rented, tax paid on rental income, then after 5 years resold it, invested in LTCG- deposit accounts and applied for NOC to close the LTC deposit  and for which income department denies unless tax paid for construction cost because it is not registered.

   Registeration act differs from state to state.

   In this case the apartment booked during construction time, it’s not like that we are land owners and entered JDA joint development agreement for construction of apartment.

   In this case the assessing questioning the year of registration 2010, now why construction should not be registered in registration act which is different act to income tax act or on any other laws..

   The registration act comes state levy and it’s not central act

   Year 2010 is of retrospective periods where any new laws or regulations act amendments can’t be applied for prior periods.

   it’s the years 2008 in which apartment booked with the builders.

   Year 2010 year of completion of construction of apartment and registered for UDS land portion under karnataka stamp act and regulations act.

   At that point of time under karnataka stamp act there was no provision to add on any construction value to the property and karnataka stamp act determines stamp duty and registration fees based on govt guidelines value prescribed from time to time and changes are made once in two years subject to prevailing conditions of the market rates, areas infrastructural development and facilities that are made to the areas etc

   Construction cost is the money spent out of money saved which was earned as income of salary which has been taxed in the previous years and taxes were paid on those salary income earnings returns filed etc and the income tax authorities cannot charge taxes on the expenses of construction cost incurred or paid out.

   When income tax authorities to access the income and to access the expenditures incured in any manner investment in property or business etc etc …

   I think taking this case as example you should write an artcles in TaxGuru, tax magazine and papers social media etc etc. and to draw attention of the CBDT chairman and members and finance minister and all members under secretaries, law bar association, practising advocate association on all india basis. 
   Actually authrities are misusing powers vested indirectly unlawfully espicialy on individuals honesty tax payers and straight forwarding people who highly educative in various services fields other than taxes and law subjects  etc etc 

   If this matter happened to any corporate companies or any business promoters who are business promotions etc they allocate cost of litigations funds and number of Advocates seniour counsels and other legal consultant firms group of people trying to support and protect them assessee company categories and whatever money spent on legal through out the  years its allowed as deductions on legal expenses 100% inspite of the fact whether the business people are corporate management companies win over the cases or lost the cases dragging out years to gether from  lower authorities and courts to highcourt, supremecourts and 3member bench, 5 member bench and many more commissions etc 

   Whereas cases similar situations and individuals status people salary class assessee where they will  go for justifications, who will bear the burden of litigation and legal cost and who have time that much to fight out the matter throughout their life.. without certainty of outcome positive  results in favour to taxpayers.

     Reply

   August 22, 2021 at 12:42 pm
2. SRSUBRAMANIAN says:

   Department must not take advantage of ignorance of assessee administrator March 1, 2016 Income Tax 1 Comment

   CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) dated 11/04/1955-Department must not take advantage of ignorance of assessee to collect more tax than what is legitimately due

   Central Board of Direct Taxes

   Circular No. 14 (XL-35)
   Miscellaneous—Refund and reliefs due to assessees—Departmental attitude towards

   Dated: 11/04/1955

   ASSESSMENT SECTIONS 143,
   The Board have issued instructions from time to time in regard to the attitude which the Officers of the Department should adopt in dealing with assessees in matters affecting their interest and convenience. It appears that these instructions are not being uniformly followed.

   2. Complaints are still being received that while ITO’s are prompt in making assessments likely to result into demands and in effecting their recovery, they are lethargic and indifferent in granting refunds and giving reliefs due to assessees under the Act. Dilatoriness or indifference in dealing with refund claims (either under s. 48 or due to appellate, revisional, etc., orders) must be completely avoided so that the public may feel that the Government are actually prompt and careful in the matter of collecting taxes and granting refunds and giving reliefs.

   3. Officers of the Department must not take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to his rights. It is one of their duties to assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particularly in the matter of claiming and securing reliefs and in this regard the Officers should take the initiative in guiding a taxpayer where proceedings or other particulars before them indicate that some refund or relief is due to him. This attitude would, in the long run, benefit the Department for it would inspire confidence in him that he may be sure of getting a square deal from the Department. Although, therefore, the responsibility for claiming refunds and reliefs rests with assessees on whom it is imposed by law, officers should :—

   (a) draw their attention to any refunds or reliefs to which they appear to be clearly entitled but which they have omitted to claim for some reason or other;

   (b) freely advise them when approached by them as to their rights and liabilities and as to the procedure to be adopted for claiming refunds and reliefs.

   4. Public Relations Officers have been appointed at important centres, but by the very nature of their duties, their field of activity is bound to be limited.

   Time Out Table Tennis Academy
   The following examples (which are by no means exhaustive) indicate the attitude which officers should adopt :—

   (a) Sec. 17(1) : While dealing with the assessment of a non-resident assessee the officer should bring to his notice that he may exercise the option to pay tax on his Indian income with reference to his total world income if it is to his advantage.

   (b) Sec. 18(3), (3A), (3B) and (3D) : The officer should in every appropriate case bring to the assessee’s notice the possibility of obtaining a certificate authorising deduction of income-tax at a rate less than the maximum or deduction of super tax at a rate lower than the flat rate, as the case may be.

   (c) Secs. 25(3) and 25(4) : The mandatory relief about exemption from tax must be granted whether claimed or not; the other relief about substitution, if not time barred, must be brought to the notice of a taxpayer.

   (d) Sec. 26A : The benefit to be obtained by registration should be explained in appropriate cases. Where an application for registration presented by a firm is found defective, the officer should point out the defect to it and give it an opportunity to present a proper application.

   (e) Sec. 33A : Cases in which the ITO or the Asstt. Commissioner thinks that an assessment should be revised, must be brought to the notice of the CIT.

   (f) Sec. 35 : Mistakes should be rectified as soon as they are discovered without waiting for an assessee to point them out.

   (g) Sec. 60(2) : Cases where relief can properly be given under this sub-section should be reported to the Board.

   5. While officers should, when requested, freely advise assessees the way in which entries should be made in various forms, they should not themselves make any in them on their behalf. Where such advice is given, it should be clearly explained to them that they are responsible for the entries made in any form and that they cannot be allowed to plead that they were made under official instructions. This equally applies to the Public Relation Officers.

   6. The intention of this circular is not that tax due should not be charged or that any favour should be shown to anybody in the matter of assessment, or that where investigations are called for, they should not be made. Whatever the legitimate tax it must be assessed and must be collected. The purpose of this circular is merely to emphasise that we should not take advantage of an assessee’s ignorance to collect more tax out of him than is legitimately due from him

   read latest abcaus posts

   Signing of ITRS and appearance by authorised representatives for assessees under bankruptcy
   RBI revised instruction on Banks Safe Deposit Lockers/Safe Custody Article Facility
   CPC can not adjust refund in excess of 20% for disputed outstanding demand
   Additional Penalty for Repeated Delivery Default by a seller/buyer – SEBI
   ICMAI proposes multidisciplinary firm for cost accountants – Read Draft Regulations
   ———– Similar Posts: ———–

   SaveShare
   About The Author
   Administrator
   Tags:cbdt circular
   Related Posts
   Transfers postings0
   CBDT transfers officers in grade of PCITs/CCITs for implementing Faceless Assessment Scheme
   CBDT0
   TDS Surveys by Income Tax Department unearths huge defaults in deduction and deposit
   Amendment to Form 3CD Tax Audit report for ICDS adjustments starting from FY 2016-17 AY 2017-18. CBDT Notification 88/20160
   Imprest account not necessarily part of partner capital account as held by ITAT was without properly analysing evidence-HC0
   One Response
   excellent service October 30, 2017
   excellent service

   Reply
   Leave a Reply
   Comment Text*
   Name*
   Email*
   Website

     Reply

   August 22, 2021 at 12:33 pm