Whenever an amount deducted as tax at source becomes incapable of being being adjusted or counted towards tax payable, it acquired the character of an income. In such an event, it partake the character of any other income and is liable to be dealt with accordingly.
The Central Excise Act, 1944 provides levy of excise duty by different methods. In a recent judgment of Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd. vs. CCE 2014 (35) STR 641 (Chhattisgarh) the Hon’ble Court held that place of removal is to be decided on facts and circumstances of each case.
The Assessing Officer made two additions. Firstly, benefit under Section 54F of the Act was denied and capital gains of Rs.51,71, 994/- was brought to tax. The second addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.19,75,410/-
If the production of cinematograph film amounts to manufacture of an article or goods within the meaning of section 104(4)(a) as it then stood, it follows that the said activity must be treated as an industrial undertaking within the purview of section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Apart from the circular, we are satisfied that, even on a common sense view, “film production” will have to be considered as a manufacturing activity and the undertaking will have to be considered as an industrial undertaking.
Issue – Whether on the facts and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was correct in holding that the investment in tax free securities/investments are represented by assessee’s own funds in the shape of share capital and reserves, ignoring the fact that the assessee is a bank involved in transactions
What the section is designed to strike at is advance or loan to a shareholder and the word shareholder can mean only the registered shareholder. The Hon’ble Supreme Court following the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s C. P. Sarathy reported in 1972 (83) ITR 170(SC) held that the beneficial owner of shares whose name does not appear in the register of the shareholders of the company cannot be said to be a shareholder though he may be beneficially entitled to the shares but he is not a shareholder.
From a reading of the Centralised Processing of Statements of Tax Deducted at Source Scheme, 2013 it becomes clear that the Department has sought to achieve a comprehensive processing of statements filed under sub-section (3) of Section 200 of the Act, including rectification of a mistake in the said statement under Section-154 of the Act.
The Revenue officers must realize that just like other powers a executive power conferred in them is in the nature of a Trust. They hold office as trustees of the public at large. They deal with public revenue and public money and that cannot be wasted in such frivolous litigation. We, therefore, dismiss these appeals with costs quantified at Rs.1,00,000/ each.
In the instant case, the transaction in question, was not cash transaction. It was merely book entries. The CIT(A) has called Remand Record from the AO, who vide report dated 05.01.1999, confirmed that the transaction in question, by mentioning that no cash was involved.
CIT v/s M/s Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. (BOmbay High Court)- Supreme Court has expressly held that the amendments to section 43B that were brought about by the Finance Act, 2003 are retrospective in nature, we find that the ITAT was fully justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,82,77,138/- on account of delayed payment of Provident Fund of employees’ contribution.
