Income Tax : Budget 2024 introduces significant amendments in trust-related provisions under the Income Tax Act, including registration timelin...
Income Tax : Learn about the amendment to Clause 22 of Form 3CD under Section 43B(h) and its impact on reporting requirements for payments to M...
Income Tax : Discover the intricacies of Income Tax Returns (ITR) in India, from types of forms to required documents and compliance measures, ...
Income Tax : Explore Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, allowing CBDT to condone delays in ITR filing due to genuine hardships. Learn pro...
Income Tax : Understand the process of condonation under Section 119(2)(b) for filing returns with genuine hardship. Learn about the time limit...
Income Tax : Learn about the tax implications on haircuts taken by banks and creditors for companies resolved under the Insolvency and Bankrupt...
Income Tax : Explore the Lok Sabha query on technical glitches in the IT portal and TRACES. Learn about processing delays, PAN-Aadhaar issues, ...
Income Tax : The CBDT awards the Taxnet 2.0 project to Bharti-Airtel Ltd, enhancing the IT Department’s digital infrastructure with secure, r...
Income Tax : Read the inaugural address from Ravi Agrawal, the new Chairman of CBDT, outlining his vision for enhancing tax administration in I...
Income Tax : Read CAASs recommendations for fair tax audit allocation, ensuring auditor independence and quality. They suggested automated allo...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that CIT has not applied his mind analytically while assuming jurisdiction for taking cognizance under section 2...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held the Discounted Cash Flow Method [DCF method] adopted by the assessee for valuing the CCPS is legitimate and in...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that once the Tribunal had called upon the AO to examine the issue afresh, the said direction could not have...
Income Tax : Rajasthan High Court held that section 119(2)(b) of Income Tax Act read with CBDT Circular No.09/2015 dated 09.06.2015 clearly ref...
Income Tax : Read the full judgment of Umang Mahendra Shah Vs Union of India by Bombay High Court, ruling that an order under Section 148A(d) w...
Income Tax : CBDT notifies Karnataka State Natural Disaster Monitoring Centre for tax exemptions on specific incomes. Effective for AY 2021-22 ...
Income Tax : Income Tax Circular 08/2024 exempts higher TDS/TCS rates if deductee/collectee dies before PAN-Aadhaar linkage, addressing taxpay...
Income Tax : Read about the latest income tax notification specifying AIMCo India Infrastructure Pension Fund for tax exemption under section 1...
Income Tax : Ministry of Finance amends tax exemption notification, extending the eligible investment deadline to 31st March 2025 under section...
Income Tax : CBDT Notification 91/2024 extends the deadline for Section 10(23FE) tax exemptions to March 31, 2025. Discover the key changes and...
CIRCULAR NO 7/2008-Income Tax Dated: August 1, 2008 In exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section (1) of section 119 of Income-tax Act, 1961, Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby directs that corporations which are established by a Central, State or Provincial Act for the welfare and economic upliftment of ex-servicemen and whose income qualifies for exemption from Income-tax u/s. 10(26 BBB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are hereby given exemption from Tax Deduction/Collection at Source on their receipts.
(i) no annexures, TDS/ TCS certificates are required to be annexed to the returns of income. Wherever documents are attached with the return, the receiving official is required to detach and return to the tax-payers all such annexures; (ii) ITR-V verification form is in the nature of an acknowledgement, and therefore, the same should be received by giving a Return Receipt Number, as if it were a return. These ITR-V verification forms are to be received in separate counters to be set up for the purpose and these forms should be kept in safe custody
The Central Board of Direct Taxes has notified amendments to the Industrial Park Scheme 2008 under sub-section (4) of section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 2nd July 2008. According to the amended scheme, the ambit of “industrial activity” has been expanded to include (i) research and experimental development on natural sciences and engineering as defined in section K, division 73, group 731 of the National Industrial Classification, 2004 Code, issued by the Central Statistical Organisation, Department of Statistics; (ii) development of computer software; and (iii) information technology enabled services as notified vide notification number S.O.. 890(E), dated the 26th September 2000 for the purposes of sections 10A, 10B and 80HHE of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The CBDT, as a measure to reduce litigation, revised the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunals, High Courts and Supreme Court. Accordingly, appeals would henceforth be filed in the ITAT only if the tax effect exceeded Rs.2,00,000, in the high court only if the tax effect exceeded Rs.4,00,000 and in the Supreme Court only if the tax effect exceeded Rs.10,00,000. However, it clarified that these monetary limits would not apply to writ matters.
The tax treatment of cross border software transactions has always been a matter of controversy. One of the major issues has been whether payments for software, where the seller retains all copyright, trademark and other proprietary rights in the software, should be characterized as royalty or as business income. This article addresses the said issue in the light of the definition of ‘royalty’ as per domestic law and as per DTAA (India – USA) and by making reference to some relevant case-laws. The author makes a pointer to the fact that though a Special Task Force was set up to examine the issues of taxation of software, no clarification has been issued by the CBDT so far. He, therefore, opines that it is high time that the CBDT/Finance Act should come up with a clarification/ amendment so as to address the confusion and litigation which is prevailing on the taxability of software payments.
The Income Tax Department has extended the last date for filing of tax returns for Tax Deducted/Collection at source for the second quarter of this fiscal to February 29. This measure is likely to provide a major relief to the employers, who could not submit their returns due to delay in clarification on employees stock options or other reasons.
THE variety of information which is nowadays being sought under the RTI Act has indeed grown in quality and magnitude. One such quality question was volleyed at the CBDT which is related to Sec 11 of the Income Tax Act.
One Vivek Bansal, Liberty House, Karnal had originally purchased deep discount bonds 1997 of Industrial Development Bank of India (I.D.B.I) @ of Rs. 5500/- each (the original purchaser). From him the assessee-respondent purchased those bonds @ Rs.9700/- each on 01.01.2001 for total value of Rs.19,40,000/ – (the assessee secondary purchaser). The original purchaser filed his return for the assessment year 2001-02 and reflected the difference in amount of purchase and the sale. Thus, a sum of Rs. 9,40,000/- became long term capital gain in respect of the original assessee. It is undisputed that the bonds were subject to accruing of interest year to year although, no income was received annually by the bond holder. The condition was modified by issuance of a press note later. The assessee-secondary purchaser received a draft of Rs. 19,08,200/-. This amount has been accounted for by the assessee-secondary purchaser.
NOTIFICATION NO 11/2008, Dated: January 18, 2008 Valuation of specified security not being an equity share in the company. 40D. For the purposes of clause (ba) of sub-section (1) of section 115WC, the fair market value of any specified security, not being an equity share in a company, on the date on which the option vests with the employee, shall be such value as determined by a merchant banker on the specified date.
If the assessing officer is going to make good an omission on the part of the assessee, he must be expressly authorised by law to do so lest he is hauled over coals for cosying up to the assessee. The recent Supreme Court verdict in Goetz (India) Ltd vs CIT (284 ITR 323), tersely dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the order of the assessing officer (AO) not allowing a deduction which it was admittedly entitled to under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 but which it had not claimed by even filing the revised return, is unexceptionable though it has come in for criticism from some quarters.
