A division bench of the Delhi High Court has held that a claim for deduction under section 10AA of the Income Tax Act which was accepted in previous years cannot be denied later due to a mere change in Business of the assessee.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Anup Jairam Bhambhani was hearing an appeal filed by the revenue against the Tribunal order in the case of assessee Macquarie Global Services Pvt. Ltd wherein the Tribunal held that once the claim of section 10AA deduction under the Income Tax Act 1961 has been accepted in the first year of the operations and also in the second year, the same cannot be withdrawn in the third year by examining the factors which were required to be seen in the first year of the claim.
Assessee Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of ‘Macquarie Global Services Limited and a captive contract service provider engaged in the business of provision of back office support services to its associated enterprises. For rendering such services, the assessee is remunerated on a cost-plus markup basis. During the financial year 0101-2011 the assessee company was operating from two separate units such as EOU unit and SEZ unit and had claim deduction under section 10AA of the act in the assessment year 2010-2011 and 2012-2013 and also claimed the same deduction in the current assessment year also. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) denied assessee’s claim of deduction for the current assessment year by holding that there is some kind of splitting up or reconstruction of the old business in terms of clause (ii) of sub-section (4) section 10AA in the assessee company.
The bench observed that the Tribunal had examined technical manpower employed in the new unit and has noted that percentage of new employees in the SEZ unit was 83% and 64% during the period relevant to the assessment years 2011- 12 and 2013-14. Clearly, new employment opportunities and jobs were created.
“Business had grown and increased substantially on setting up of the new unit, which was a legitimate and wise business decision and not subterfuge and an illegal act,” the bench said.
Dismissing the departmental appeal, the bench held that “In the factual background, the Tribunal has accepted that the new unit was a separate identity for its income to qualify for exemption under Section 10AA for it was not formed and created by ‘splitting up’ or ‘reconstructing’ the existing business. The new unit was also not formed by transferring any machinery or plant previously used. A fresh investment was made in the new unit. The revenue earning and profits generated were clearly attributable to the new unit.”
Advocates Salil Kapoor, Mr. Shivansh Pandya, Ms. Soumya Singh and Advocate Ms. Ananya appeared for the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has recently issued a circular clarifying that the service of printing of pictures would attract 18 percent GST.
This is in the light of representations received by the Board regarding the issue that the service of “printing of pictures” correctly covered under service code 998386 – “Photographic and video graphics processing services” is being classified by trade under service code 998912 – “Printing and reproduction services of recorded media, on a fee or contract basis”.
The two service codes attract different GST rate of 18% and 12% respectively and therefore the wrong classification may lead to short payment of GST.
Also Read: Services provided by IFC and ADB exempt from GST: CBIC
The Board noted that according to Explanatory Notes to the scheme of classification of services, the service code “998386 Photographic and video graphics processing services, includes, – developing of negatives and the printing of pictures for others according to customer specifications such as enlargement of negatives or slides, black and white processing; colour printing of images from film or digital media; slide and negative duplicates, reprints, etc.; developing of film for both amateur photographers and commercial clients; preparing of photographic slides; copying of films; converting of photographs and films to other media.”
It was further noted that according to explanatory notes, the service code 998912 “Printing and reproduction services of recorded media, on a fee or contract basis” clearly excludes, – -color printing of images from film or digital media, cf. 998386, -audio and video production services, cf. 999613”
The circular, therefore, clarified that “service of “printing of pictures” falls under service code “998386: Photographic and video graphics processing services” and not under “998912: Printing and reproduction services of recorded media, on a fee or contract basis” of the scheme of classification of service annexed to notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax(Rate) dated 28.06.2018.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Indore bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the addition cannot be sustained for making cash payment exceeding monetary limit if the same was due to the instance of the seller.
An addition was made against the assessee following the search proceedings by the department in respect of cash payments amounting to Rs.32,93,500/- by invoking provisions of section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act.
The assessee contended that the payment in cash exceeding the monetary limit so prescribed was due to the business expediency as the sellers of the land insisted on making payments in cash. It was contended that the assessee had no intention of evading tax.
While admitting the contentions of the assessee, the Tribunal held that “It is stated by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the cash payment was made on the insistence of the seller of the land. It is further stated that the amount is duly recorded in the sale deeds and there is no doubt raised about the genuineness of the transaction by the authorities below. He, therefore, submitted that in the light of the various case laws, addition by invoking provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act was not justified. Looking to the totality of the facts and in view of the fact that the assessee had to make payment on the insistence of the sellers respectively and following the judgment of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Smt. Harishila Chordia Vs. ITO in 298 ITR 92 and more particularly in the case of Anupam Teleservices Vs. ITO in tax appeal No.556 of 2013 of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, we do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is hereby affirmed.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentA Group of Minister (GoM) has been constituted under the chairmanship of Bihar Finance Minister Sushil Kumar Modi to analyze the revenue shortfall in States under the new Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime.
In its 31st meeting of GST Council held on 22nd December 2018 at New Delhi, the Council had decided to form a Group of Ministers (GoM) on Analysis of Revenue from GST. The GoM on Analysis of Revenue from GST shall consist of the following members:
The other members in the GoM are Shri Karnataka Minister Krishna Byre Gowda, Kerala Finance Minister Dr. T. M. Thomas Isaac, Punjab Minister Shri Manpreet Singh Badal, Odisha Minister Shri Shashi Bhushan Behera, Haryana Minister Capt. Abhimanyu and Goa Minister Shri Mauvin Godinho.
The main functions of the GoM are to analyze the State-wise trends of revenue collection both under the pre and post GST, to analyze the structural patterns emerging out of certain major sectors of economy affecting the revenue collection, including the services sector and to identify the underlying reasons for deviations in revenue collection trends vis-a-vis original assumption arrived at during design and implementation of GST, in particular less than expected revenue collection of some of the major consuming States.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that seeking unnecessary adjournments by the Advocates would amount to professional misconduct.
While hearing the petition in a civil suit, Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia pointed out that the adjournments are growing like cancer, which is eroding the system.
The Court further said that the advocates are not mouthpieces of their clients for the purpose of delaying court proceedings, and they have the sacrosanct duty towards the court.
The petition was pending from 2017 and the further proceedings of the civil suit have stayed. When the matter came up for hearing, the counsel sought for time for arguments. Later, two opportunities were given to the counsel, however, the proceedings could not be completed as the counsel sought for further adjournments.
Dissatisfied by these actions, the Court said that by seeking unnecessary adjournments, they were frustrating the legitimate right of one of the litigating party and thus, by adopting dilatory tactics, they are creating a situation where the litigating party may lose its faith in the judiciary.
Also Read: Top 30 Income Tax Judgments in 2018
“It is the duty of the Courts to decide the matters as early as possible, and if the lawyers refuse to co-operate with the Courts, then a time has come, where the Court would be left with no other option but to decide the matters on its own, by going through the record, and this situation would never help the litigating party and the lawyers must understand that when they have been engaged by their clients with a hope and belief, that their Counsel would place their case before the Court, in a most effective manner, then after having accepted the brief, it is the duty of the lawyer to live up to the expectation of his client, so that the faith and belief of the client on his lawyer may continue. It is also high time when the Bar must either accept its responsibility for unnecessarily seeking adjournments or must teach their members, that have joined the noble profession, it is the duty of every lawyer to devote full time to prepare the cases,” the court said.
The court said seeking adjournments for no reason does amount to professional misconduct. It added that Bar Councils must also rise to the occasion either by issuing necessary instructions to the advocates on its roll or by taking disciplinary action against the advocate if any complaint with regard to seeking unnecessary adjournments by the advocate is made.
“A time has come, where the Bar has to raise its standard and must fulfill the expectations of the litigating parties, for early disposal of the cases. Justice delayed justice denied. The Bar must not try to create hurdles in the justice dispensation system, by unnecessarily seeking adjournments and above all, must not try to pinch the Court, by saying that since, the adjournment has been refused, therefore, under compulsion, they are arguing the matters. Once, the lawyer has accepted the brief, then it is his bounden duty towards the institution. They have a duty towards their client, they have a duty to prepare the case and present the case properly without suppressing any fact so that they can effectively assist the Court,” the court said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Central Government is likely to mandate composition dealers and service providers to declare their GST registration status in invoices to ensure that they do not charge any tax from buyers. This is to ensure relief and protection to the consumers.
The measure, once implemented, would check the widespread practice of composition dealers of charging GST from purchasers and not depositing it with the exchequer, an official said to ET.
According to the report, the revenue department is also planning to launch a campaign to educate consumers that the dealers opting for composition scheme are not required to charge the goods and services tax (GST) from purchasers, the official said.
The present GST Composition Scheme requires the traders and manufacturers to pay only 1 percent GST on goods which otherwise attract a higher levy of either 5, 12 or 18 percent. Such dealers are also not permitted to charge GST from the purchaser. Of the 1.17 crore businesses registered under GST, about 20 lakh have opted for composition scheme.
Also Read: Top 15 GST Judgments in 2018
“It has come to the notice of the government that a large number of composition dealers are levying GST at higher rates and not depositing it with the government,” the official told PTI.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), is considering a proposal as per which, the businesses will have to mandatorily mention in the invoice generated by them that they are composition dealers and, hence, are not required to charge GST.
“Simultaneously, we will educate consumers that they should not pay GST while buying goods from composition scheme dealers,” the official said.
To ease compliance burden for small businesses, the GST law provides for composition scheme under which traders and manufacturers with an annual turnover of up to Rs 1 crore can pay 1 percent GST. This threshold will increase to Rs 1.5 crore from April 1.
The 32nd meeting of the GST council held at Delhi last week permitted the service providers and those dealing in both goods and services with a turnover of Rs 50 lakh to opt for composition scheme.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has clarified that the services provided by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) are exempted from the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) regime.
According to the ADB Act, 1996, the Bank, its assets, properties, income, and its operations and transactions shall be exempt from all the taxation and from all customs duties. The Bank shall also be exempt from any obligation for payment, withholding or collection of any tax or duty.
DEA had already conveyed vide letter No. 1/28/2002-ADB dated 22-01-2004 addressed to ADB that taxable services provided by ADB are exempted from service tax.
Similarly, IFC Act, 1958 also provides that the Corporation, its assets, properties, income and its operations and transactions authorized by the Agreement, shall be immune from all taxation and from all customs duties. The Corporation shall also be immune from liability for the collection or payment of any tax or duty.
In 2016, the CESTAT Mumbai in the case of M/s Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd had held that when the enactments that honor international agreements specifically immunize the operations of the service provider from taxability, a law contrary to that in the form of Section 66A of Finance Act, 1994 will not prevail.
The CBIC Circular said that “With the provider being not only immune from taxation but also absolved of any obligation to collect and deposit any tax, there is no scope for subjecting the recipient to tax. There is no need for a separate exemption and existing laws enacted by the sovereign legislature of the Union suffice for the purpose of giving effect to Agreements.”
“Accordingly, it is clarified that the services provided by IFC and ADB are exempt from GST in terms of provisions of IFC Act, 1958 and ADB Act. The exemption will be available only to the services provided by ADB and IFC and not to any entity appointed by or working on behalf of ADB or IFC,” the circular said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) may announce the result of the the Information Systems Audit [ISA] Assessment Test held on 22nd December 2018. The results of other CA exams including the Final and Intermediate examinations will also be announced on the same date.
Also Read: ICAI likely to declare CA Results on 23rd January
An announcement of the Institute said that “The result of the Information Systems Audit [ISA] Assessment Test held on 22nd December 2018 is likely to be declared on 23 rd January, 2019 around 6.00 PM at the Institute’s office at New Delhi. The result of the above Assessment Test will be available on the Institute’s website www.icai.org.”
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) through its Committee for Members in Industry & Business(CMI&B) is organizing Job Fair for CA inter/ IPCC/PCC/ PE-II qualified candidates to provide them placement opportunity.
An announcement made by the Institute said that “Yet another initiative on the part of the Committee for Members in Industry & Business(CMI&B) in the form of potential opportunity for the CA Inter/IPCC/PE-II to secure career advancement in the leading organizations!”
According to the announcement, the Job Fair is a platform specifically designed and aims to provide placement opportunities to the CA Inter/IPCC/PE II.
This programme is an extended dimension to the existing initiatives i.e Campus Placement Programmes, undertaken by CMI&B to provide employment opportunities to the Newly Qualified Chartered Accountants, organized twice a year.
Candidates who wish to register for the programme shall be required to remit a Registration cum participation fee amounting to Rs 1,000/ inclusive of taxes to get the Centre Code e.g MUM. It is the non-refundable amount.
The following guidelines shall be kept in mind by the candidates.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has recently clarified that the GST Exemption can be granted to the services by the Business Facilitator (BF) or a Business Correspondent (BC) to Banking Company with respect to the accounts in the rural areas subject to certain conditions.
Regarding the value of services by BF/BC to a banking company, the Board clarified that the banking company is the service provider in the business facilitator model or the business correspondent model operated by a banking company as per RBI guidelines. The banking company is liable to pay GST on the entire value of service charge or fee charged to customers whether or not received via business facilitator or the business correspondent.
Also Read: Top 15 GST Judgments in 2018
With regard to the scope of services by BF/BC to a banking company with respect to accounts in rural areas, it was clarified that “for the purpose of availing exemption from GST under Sl. No. 39 of said notification, the conditions flowing from the language of the notification should be satisfied. These conditions are that the services provided by a BF/BC to a banking company in their respective individual capacities should fall under the Heading 9971 and that such services should be with respect to accounts in a branch located in the rural area of the banking company. The procedure for classification of the branch of a bank as located in the rural area and the services which can be provided by BF/BC is governed by the RBI guidelines. Therefore, classification adopted by the bank in terms of RBI guidelines in this regard should be accepted,” the Board said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe official website of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) will be temporarily down for a few days due to the maintenance on its Information Systems.
In a recent announcement, the Institute informed that “ICAI is on scheduled maintenance on its Information Systems on account of migration to an integrated online platform between 11th January 2019 through the midnight of 18th January 2019.”
It was also informed that “all activities for students and members remain affected until then. For any query, reach us at 0120-3045979, 0120-2975833 or SSP.Support@icai.in.”
A two-judge bench of the Bombay High Court has held that the holding of shares for a short period only will not convert capital gain into business income.
Justices M S Sanklecha and Akil Kureshi have held that this would be contrary to be legislative mandate which itself provides that investment held for less than 12 months is to be termed as short-term capital gain.
The assessee-Company, in its return, declared short term capital gain of Rs.9.42 crores. Rejecting return, the Assessing Officer treated the same as business income by finding that all the scrips in respect of which the short-term capital was gained were held for a very short period i.e. purchased and sold during the year.
The assessee claimed that its regular business is to trade in engineering goods, metal and other commodities. It has also made investments in shares over the last 10 to 15 years out of its own funds i.e. without any borrowings and loans.
Also Read: Top 30 Income Tax Judgments in 2018
The bench pointed out that the law itself provides that such gain may be brought to tax under the head short term capital gain when the shares are held for a period of fewer than 12 months. It was also noted the fact that for earlier years, the Assessing Officer had accepted the claim made under the head short term capital gain in respect of purchase and sale of shares.
While dismissing the appeal filed by the department, the bench observed that the issue of classification of income on the sale of shares as business income or as short-term capital gains is to be decided the facts of each case.
“The tests to be applied for such determination is provided in CBDT Circular No.4 of 2007. We note that the Tribunal kept in mind the tests as provided in the above Circular in the context of the facts and found is that these investments were out of its own funds and not borrowed funds, further it maintained a distinction between trading in shares and investments. Thus, two portfolios one for “Investment” and other for “Trading”. Besides for the earlier years, the Revenue accepted the claim of short-term capital gain. Thus, the income has to be taxed as short-term capital gain. We are of the view that respondent holding the shares for a short period, will not convert the capital gain into business income. This would be contrary to be legislative mandate which itself provides that when the investment is held for less than 12 months, it is to be termed as short-term capital gain,” the bench said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Central Government is likely to introduce a special insurance scheme for small traders registered under the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ), ahead of the general elections due in next couple of months, ET reports.
The benefit would be to the for lakhs of GST-registered small and medium scale traders.
According to sources, the scheme may provide accidental insurance cover on the lines of Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY) for the traders at an affordable premium.
The scheme would be based on the scheme being operated by the Uttar Pradesh government for traders.
Also Read: Kerala High Court upholds VAT Assessments post-GST
According to sources, the said small traders could get an accidental insurance cover of up to Rs 10 lakh based on turnover. The scheme, if approved by the government, is likely to be announced by the end of this month before the commencement of the Budget session, the sources added. PMSBY currently provides Rs 2 lakh accidental cover just at an affordable rate of Rs 12 per annum.
The Scheme is available to people in the age group 18 to 70 years with a savings bank account who give their consent to join and enable auto-debit on or before May 31 every year. Besides, the government is also considering to provide concessional finance to traders, who wish to adopt computerization and upgrade their businesses.
It was reported that a special policy may be formulated to encourage women entrepreneurs with a higher interest subvention to these entrepreneurs is also being contemplated.
Out of the government procurement mandated from small traders, a certain percentage could be reserved for women entrepreneurs. Last year, the government had announced 59-minute loan sanctions, relaxation in labour laws, easier compliance with environmental rules and changes in company laws for small and medium enterprises to give a boost to the nation’s second-biggest employing sector.
Also Read: Top 15 GST Judgments in 2018
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai has held that the income received from the property given on leave and license basis till the approval of real estate project is in the nature of the business income.
Initially, the Assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing of engineering goods/ components/ spares which was discontinued later. Thereafter, the assessee changed its business for development of real estate and converted its land into stock in trade. The assessee entered into the development agreement with Rajesh Real Estate Development P. Ltd. on 12.07.2010 for the development of the land. Earlier the assessee also agreed to alienate the larger portion of the land to Rajesh Estate and Nirman Limited by virtue of letter dated 20.12.2007. The assessee has also converted its land from industrial zone to residential use and necessary permission was also taken.
The assessee declared the rental income received by it under the head business income. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the return and held that the no activity of business was going on, therefore, the said rental income was treated as income from house property.
Also Read: Quoting of Low Rent by Flat Owner is Tax Evasion: ITAT
While allowing the contentions of the assessee, the Tribunal observed that all the activity done by them speaks that the assessee was in the business activity.
“The assessee was maintaining the office and also the paying the salary to its employee and also incurring the other expenses such as traveling and other administrative expenses etc. The assessee temporarily letting out the premises to Broker India P. Ltd. by virtue of leave and license agreement dated 17.04.2009. The property was given on leave and license basis till the approval of the real estate project. The memorandum and Articles of Association permit letting and leasing of property which is the business of the appellant company. The CIT(A) has relied upon the case decided by Hon’ble Apex Court titled as Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. V. CIT (2015) 277 CTR 0185 (SC). It also came into notice that in the earlier assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act, the revenue has accepted the rent as business income. The facts are not distinguishable at this stage also,” the Tribunal observed.
“There is no other distinguishable material on record to which it can be assumed that the income of the assessee on letting out the property falls within the purview of house property. Taking into account, all the facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) is quite correct and in accordance with the law which is not liable to interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly, these issues are being decided in favor of the assessee against the revenue,” the Tribunal said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentAlso Read: Top 30 Income Tax Judgments in 2018
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has clarified that the supply of food and drinks by the educational institutions to its students would attract 5 percent GST.
There were some ambiguities regarding the tax rate applicable to such services since the Explanation 1 to Entry 7 (i) of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) contained the words “school, college”. Due to this, doubts were raised on whether the supply of food and drinks by an educational institution to its students is eligible for exemption under Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 Sl. No 66, which exempts services provided by an educational institution to its students, faculty, and staff
To resolve the issue, the Board clarified that the supply of all services by an educational institution to its students, faculty, and staff is exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, Sl. No. 66. Such services include the supply of food and beverages by an educational institution to its students, faculty, and staff.
Also Read: GST Exemption available to Long-Duration Programmes by IIM till 30th Jan 2108: CBIC
“As stated in explanation 3 (ii) to Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 Chapter, Section, Heading, Group or Service Codes mentioned in column (2) of the table in Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 are only indicative. A supply is eligible for exemption under an entry of the said notification where the description given in column (3) of the table leaves no room for any doubt. Accordingly, it is clarified that supply of food and beverages by an educational institution to its students, faculty, and staff, where such supply is made by the educational institution itself, is exempt under Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, vide Sl. No. 66 w.e.f. 01-07-2017 itself,” the board said.
However, it further reiterated that such supply of food and beverages by any person other than the educational institutions based on a contractual arrangement with such institution is leviable to GST@ 5%.
“In order to remove any doubts on the issue, Explanation 1 to Entry 7(i) of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 has been amended vide Notification No. 27/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 31.12.2018 to omit from it the words “school, college”. Further, heading 9963 has been added in Column (2) against entry at Sl. No. 66 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, vide Notification No. 28/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 31.12.2018,” it added.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentAlso Read: Top 15 GST Judgments in 2018
The Institute of Cost Accountants of India (ICMAI) has postponed the examination for Certificate In Accounting Technician (CAT) which was scheduled to be held on Today.
However, the new schedule and time have not been prescribed by the Institute yet.
“It is hereby notified for general information that due to unavoidable/administrative reasons, the Certificate in Accounting Technician (CAT) Examination scheduled to be held on 12th January 2019 is postponed. The new date & day for the examination shall be announced soon. Inconvenience caused is deeply regretted,” the Institute said in a statement.
The Mumbai bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the services rendered by the ‘lead generators’ does not amount to service by ‘insurance agent’ for the purpose of imposing service tax on the amount of commission received by the Reliance Life Insurance Company.
The department was of the view that the ‘lead generators’ are nothing but insurance agents and they were imparted with the training and technical knowledge in the field of life insurance distribution by the respondent- Company. According to the department, they were actually canvassing and soliciting the insurance business from prospective customers and short-listing, for the attention of the respondent, such persons as showed interest in the products of the respondent.
On behalf of the respondent- Company, it was contended that the provision of service by “Insurance Agents” alone is liable to be discharged, under the ‘reverse charge mechanism’ and that services rendered by any person, even if otherwise taxable, is not the responsibility of the recipient of the service.
On appeal, the first appellate authority quashed the original order and granted relief to the respondents.
On departmental appeal, the division bench upheld the order and held that The extract of a sample agreement entered into between the respondent and the ‘lead generator’ makes it amply clear that their function is limited to marketing of the product whereas an ‘insurance agent’ acts in place of the insurance company in so far as the policyholder is concerned. This is not to disclaim the scope of coverage of the service provided by ‘lead generator’ under any other head of taxable service. To the extent that the burden to discharge the tax liability is not specifically transferred to the present respondent as a recipient under any other taxable services, the show cause notice would fail as rightly held in the impugned order.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) is likely to announce the results of ICAI November 2018 CA CPT, CA Foundation, CA Inter and CA Final Results on 23rd of January 2019.
“The results of the Chartered Accountants Final Examination(Old course & New Course), Foundation Examination and Common Proficiency Test (CPT) held in November/December, 2018 are likely to be declared on Wednesday, the 23. January 2019 around 6.00 P.M.,” an announcement said.
The same as well as the All India merit list (upto the 50. Rank in the case of Final and Foundation Examination only) will be available on the following websites, caiexam.icai.org, caresults.icai.orq and icai.nic.in
“Arrangements have also been made for the students of Final Examination (Old course & New Course), Foundation Examination and Common Proficiency Test (CPT) desirous of having results on their e-mall addresses to register their requests at the website i.e. icalexam.ical.orq from 19. January 2019. All those registering their requests will be provided the, results through e-mail on the e-mail addresses registered as above immediately after the declaration of the result,” it said.
Recently, the ICAI has also announced its decision to tweak the exam pattern for CA Inter and Final Examinations from May 2019.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has clarified that GST exemption available to long duration programmes by Indian Institute of Management (IIM) till 30th January 2018. For the period from 31st January, degrees/ diploma awarded by IIMs under IIM Act, 2017 are exempted under GST as they would be treated as ‘educational institutions’.
The Goods and Services Tax Council, after its 31st meeting, had recommended clarifying that with effect from 31st January 2018 degrees/ diploma awarded by IIMs under IIM Act, 2017 will be exempted under the new tax regime.
The Indian Institutes of Management are providing various long duration programs (one year or more) for which they award diploma/ degree certificate duly recommended by Board of Governors as per the power vested in them under the IIM Act, 2017.
The Board clarified that services provided by Indian Institutes of Management to their students- in all such long duration programs (one year or more) are exempt from levy of GST. As per information received from IIM Ahmedabad, Annexure 1 to this circular provides a sample list of programmes which are of long duration (one year or more), recognized by law and are exempt from GST.
Also Read: Kerala High Court upholds VAT Assessments post-GST
“For the period from 1st July 2017 to 30th January 2018, IIMs were not covered by the definition of educational institutions as given in notification No. 12/ 2017 Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017. Thus, they were not entitled to exemption under Sl. No. 66 of the said notification. However, there was a specific exemption to following three programs of IIMs under Sl. No. 67 of notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate): – (i) two-year full time Post Graduate Programmes in Management for the Post Graduate Diploma in Management, to which admissions are made on the basis of the Common Admission Test (CAT) conducted by the Indian Institute of Management, (ii) fellow programme in Management, (iii)five years integrated programme in Management. Therefore, for the period from 1st July 2017 to 30th January 2018, GST exemption would be available only to three long duration programs specified above,” the circular said.
Indian Institutes of Management also provide various short duration/ short term programs for which they award participation certificate to the executives/ professionals as they are considered as “participants” of the said programmes.
“These participation certificates are not any qualification recognized by law. Such participants are also not considered as students of Indian Institutes of Management. Services provided by IIMs as an educational institution to such participants are not exempt from GST. Such short duration executive programs attract standard rate of GST @ 18% (CGST 9% + SGST 9%). As per information received from IIM Ahmedabad, Annexure 2 to this circular provides a sample list of programmes which are short duration executive development programs, available for participants other than students and are not exempt from GST,” it said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentAlso Read: Top 15 GST Judgments in 2018
The Mumbai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that declaring low rent for a flat by the owner in the income tax return is a device for tax evasion.
The assessee, an NRI, let out its flat to Bank of America for a rent of Rs.2 Lacs per month. The assessee also received interest-free security deposit of Rs.4 Crores from Bank of America and reflected lesser rent of Rs.0.25 Lacs in AY 2009-10 as well as in impugned AY.
The assessing officer opined that the assessee was compensated for the loss of rent by way of interest-free security deposit from the tenant and it was merely a tax reduction device to give the loss to the exchequer. It further transpired that the interest-free deposit received by the assessee was advanced to family members without interest and no income was reflected against the security deposit received by the assessee.
On the second appeal, the Tribunal upheld the department’s view that it was an income tax reduction device and also the addition of income of Rs 2 lakh per month as rent from the flat.
Also Read: Auditor can’t Issue Valuation Certificates to Auditee Company: ITAT
In an earlier year, the bank had paid him Rs 2 lakh per month as rent. The Income Tax department held that Vaswani was compensated for the loss of rent by way of an interest-free security deposit from the tenant. It was merely a device for reducing the income tax liability. Also, the deposit was advanced interest-free to family members. Thus, no income was reflected against the deposit.
Dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee, the Tribunal held that “It is noted that property situated at Flat No.72, L Block, Maker Tower, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai was actually let out to Bank of America during AY 2007-08 @ Rs.2 Lacs per month. However, this rent has drastically been reduced to Rs.25,000/- per month upon receipt of interest-free security deposit of Rs. 4 Crore from the tenant. No plausible/cogent explanation regarding drastic reduction has been placed on record. Secondly, similar addition in immediately preceding AY 2009-10 was accepted by the assessee by not preferring the second appeal and the matter had already attained finality in the preceding year. Another important factor to be noted that interest-free security deposit received by the assessee was advanced to sister concerns without any interest and no income has been reflected by the assessee against the same. The totality of the above facts lends credence to the reasoning of both the lower authorities and therefore, the conclusion that the whole exercise was a colorable device to reduce the overall tax burden, could not be said to be without any sound basis.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentAlso Read: Top 30 Income Tax Judgments in 2018
The Kerala High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the VAT assessments post-GST rollout.
In Sheen Golden Jewels (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. the State of Kerala, Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu was considering the Constitutional validity of Savings and Repeal Provisions of Kerala GST Act, 2017.
Earlier, the Court had granted the stay against all coercive proceedings till the final order.
The petitioner had questioned the constitutional validity of Section 174 of the Kerala State Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. According to the petitioner, the Savings & Repeals Provisions under the said section is violative of clauses 2, 17 & 19 of the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2016.
The petition further stated that Section 174 is deprived of any power and therefore any penalty proceedings initiated under it is invalid. Based on these reasons, the petitioner submits that the Revenue cannot impose penalties for the AY 2010-11, 2011-12 in February 2018.
The petitioners were represented by Senior Counsel N. Venkataraman, Advocate K.P. Abdul Azeez and Advocate Akhil Suresh.
