Goods and Services Tax : Kerala HC rules that GST orders under Section 73 must have digital or manual signatures to be valid, quashing impugned orders in t...
Goods and Services Tax : Explore Section 61 of CGST Act, covering scrutiny of GST returns, officer's authority, taxpayer obligations, and implications for ...
Goods and Services Tax : The Kerala SGST guidelines address the adjudication of multiple Show Cause Notices, ensuring consistency in decision-making across...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about GST amnesty provisions for waiving interest, penalties, and regularizing ITC under Section 16(4) of CGST Act. Apply by...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about GST return scrutiny under Section 61 of the CGST Act, 2017. Understand the process, objectives, and key areas of compl...
Goods and Services Tax : KSCAA highlights practical GST challenges in Sec 128A & Sec 16(4), urging clarifications on appeals, ITC, interest waivers, and mu...
Goods and Services Tax : Gauhati High Court held that the Summary of the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 is not a substitute to the Show Cause Notice to be...
Goods and Services Tax : The Supreme Court issues notice on a plea challenging GST notifications extending limitation for adjudication under Section 73 of ...
Goods and Services Tax : Calcutta High Court dismissed a plea challenging an SCN under the CGST Act, citing availability of a statutory appeal remedy under...
Goods and Services Tax : Assessee clarified that Form ST-3 was incorrect as some of the invoices inadvertently remained unaccounted for the said period and...
Goods and Services Tax : Gauhati High Court held that issuance of summary of the Show Cause Notice [SCN] doesn’t dispense with requirement of issuance of...
Goods and Services Tax : Kerala SGST issues guidelines on issuing separate notices for Sections 73 and 74. Ensures clarity and uniformity in handling GST d...
Assessing Officer committed an error in resorting to explanation to section 73 of the Act. The issue before him was whether the income earned by the assessee through sale of shares should be taxed as business income or should be treated as capital gain. Such issue had to be decided on the basis of the question whether the assessee is involved in any business of buying and selling shares or had purchased and sold the shares by way of investment.
First issue is whether the provisions of Explanation to section 73 would apply when the entire business consists of purchase and sale of shares. This issue is covered by the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Arvind Investments Ltd. (supra), in which it has been held that Explanation to Section 73 would apply even when entire business consists of purchase and sale of shares.
The transaction of purchase and sale of shares would be held as speculative business only if the company was hit by the Explanation to section 73. The implication of the Explanation is that if a company incurs a speculation loss in a manner deemed in the explanation such loss shall not be set off except against profit and gains, if any, of another speculation business.
CIT vs. Darshan Securities Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)- During the assessment year, the assessee returned an Income of Rs.2,25,04,588 from service charges. The assessee had a loss of Rs.02,23,32,127 in share trading. The assessee had a dividend income of Rs.4,79,325/. The assessee claimed that in computing the gross total income for the purpose of the explanation to Section 73, the income from service charges had to be adjusted against the loss in share trading.
ITO, Mumbai Vs GSB Capital Markets Ltd (ITAT Mumbai)- Whether where the assessee has considered the amount receivable from debtor as bad debts in the books of account, no disallowance can be made for want of fulfilment of conditions of section 36(2) – Whether where the amount is given to the sister concern by the assessee interest-free out of own funds and for business purposes, no disallowance can be made for interest expenses u/s 40A(2)(a) – Whether the losses of mutual funds are rightly adjusted against the speculation profit on shares in view of explanation to section 73 – Whether where the amount is taken by the assessee under a business transaction, no addition can be made u/s 2(22)(e) for deemed dividend. – Assessee’s appeal partly allowed.
The assessee earned a profit on sale of shares held as stock-in-trade. This profit was offered as profit from a ’speculation business’ and was set off against a ’speculation loss’ brought forward from an earlier assessment year. The AO took the view that the profit from sale of shares was not from a ’speculation business’ on the ground that the assessee
. In view of the above decision, the company whose principal business is that of granting of loans and advances, may earn a comparatively high income from some other activity in a particular year, merely because the income/loss from share trading in the year under consideration is higher than the interest income,
Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Appellate Tribunal – Powers of – Assessment year 1996-97 -Whether though Tribunal is not akin to a Court but functions discharged by it are similar to a Court, and, hence, in addition to its expressed statutory powers it has got inherent power to pass such orders as may be necessary for ends of justice – Held, yes –
Admittedly, the assessee company was dealing in Cement and also engaged in the business of dealing in shares. There is no dispute over the fact that the assessee had taken delivery of shares before selling them. The assessee company had claimed set off of unabsorbed speculation loss relating to assessment year 1995-96 and 1997-98 carried forward in the current assessment year 2003-04.
T.K. Jayaraman, Technical Member. – This appeal has been filed against the Adjudication Order No. 15/2007 (VR), dated 17-5-2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Visakhapatnam-II Commissionerate. 2. Shri MSV Prasad, the learned Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellants and Ms. Sudha Koka, the learned SDR for the revenue.
