The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) notified the Articled Assistants to be eligible for Industrial Training after completing a minimum of 18 months of practical training.
The ICAI has notified the Chartered Accountants (Amendment) Regulations, 2021 which seeks to amend the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988.
In the Chartered Accountants Regulations, 1988, for regulation 51, was substituted which says that an articled assistant who has passed the Intermediate (Professional Competence) Examination or Professional Education (Examination-II) or Intermediate examination and has completed a minimum of eighteen months of practical training according to these regulations shall be eligible for industrial training.
Regulation 51 further says that an articled assistant may, serve as an industrial trainee for a period specified in sub-regulation (4) in the offices of the Central or State Governments, Central statutory and judicial authorities, regulatory bodies, banking companies and such other departments of Central or State Governments, Institution or Organisation as may be decided by the Council from time to time; or in any of the financial, commercial, industrial undertakings with minimum fixed assets or minimum total turnover or minimum paid-up share capital as may be approved by the Council from time to time.
An articled assistant shall inform his principal about such industrial training at least three months before the date on which such training is to commence.
The period of industrial training may be between nine months to eighteen months.
The industrial training shall be received under a member of the Institute. An Associate who has been a member for a continuous period of at least three years shall be entitled to train one industrial trainee at a time and a fellow shall be entitled to train two industrial trainees at a time, whether such trainees be articled assistants or audit assistants.
Provided that in the case of the Central or State Governments, Central statutory and judicial authorities, regulatory bodies, banking companies and other departments of Central or State Governments, Institution or Organisation, the industrial training shall be imparted by an officer who is also a member of the Institute of that Government, Authority, Body, Bank, Department of Central or State Government, Institution or Organisation, as may be recognised by the Council from time to time.
Provided further that the entitlement of such an officer who is also a member of the Institute to train the industrial trainee shall be determined by the Council from time to time keeping in view the number of years of service and the nature of services being rendered by the department concerned.
An agreement of training shall be entered into in the form approved by the Council.
It is further notified that on completion of the industrial training, the member shall issue a certificate in the form approved by the Council to the trainee and forward a copy of the same to the Secretary.
The period of industrial training referred under this regulation, shall be treated as service under articles for all purposes of these Regulations, provided the certificate referred to in sub-regulation (7) is produced.
Subject to the provisions of sub-regulation (1), an articled assistant may also serve as an industrial trainee for a period from six to eighteen months in any foreign Country under a member of the accountancy body in that country recognized by the International Federation of Accountants in such manner as may be determined by the Council from time to time.
A member may depute a trainee for industrial training upto a period of three months in any foreign Country, in such manner as may be determined by the Council. The industrial trainee shall be paid such a monthly stipend as may be agreed mutually between the industrial trainee and the member imparting the industrial training.”
In regulation 54, in sub-regulation (5), for the words “one year”, the words “eighteen months” shall be substituted.
In regulation 58 in sub-regulation (2), for the words “If the period of the excess leave taken is sought to be served”, the words “The period of excess leave taken shall be served” shall be substituted; and for the words “last served his articles,” the words “last served his articles and” shall be substituted; (b) sub-regulation (4) shall be omitted.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The West Bengal Finance Minister, Dr Amit Mitra wrote a letter to the Union Finance Minister, Nirmala Sitharaman wherein he stated that GST Council meetings have become acrimonious, vexing & toxic with the erosion of mutual trust that had held fast b/w States & Centre since the inception of the Council. Now would be the time for us to pull together & rebuild trust & faith.
Mitra while expressing anguish said, “many of us have observed a steady breakdown of the spirit of cooperative federalism and the erosion of the commitment to work out a consensus in the GST Council Meetings.”
The letter reads, “We are passing through dangerous times for the GST regime itself when States’ own revenues are in dire distress with the growth of (-) 3% during FY 2020-21. The gap between projected revenue and revenue collected has ballooned to Rs.2,75,606 crores. The actual compensation due to the States for 2020-21 has reached Rs. 74,398 crores. Fraudulent transactions hit a peak of Rs. 70.000 crores according to Nandan Nilekani’s presentation to the GST Council.”
Mitra also recalled many instances when GoI (The Chair) yielded to suggestions even from a lone voice from a State and in turn. States yielded to Gol proposals despite reservations. The Council vehemently debated over thousands of pages to formulate the GST Law. IGST Law and GST Compensation Law without any bitterness or antagonism. The possibility of a consensus almost broke down over how taxpayers would be divided between Centre and States (vertical or horizontal formula) ending with a consensus on a 1.5 crore threshold, as proposed by States. But now arriving at such a consensus, even for much simpler matters, has become elusive.
Mitra further wrote in the letter that Hon’ble Minister, given the impending crisis that the GST regime is facing today, now would be the time for us to pull together and rebuild trust and faith, not just hear but to listen to each other’s logic with an open mind as we have done, for many years in the past. when we cut across party lines and regional diversities.
“I recall how we, the coastal States came together, differing with the GoI on taxing in territorial waters. The States which expressed a common view on this matter at the GST Council included Odisha (BJD), Andhra (TDP), Tamil Nadu (AIADMK), Kamataka (Congress), Gujurat (BJP), and West Bengal (TMC). After long discussions and presentations by officers, the Chair yielded to the coastal states’ demands overruling objections from officials to reach a consensus. Unfortunately, today we find the prevalence of a narrow view of political majoritarianism prevailing in the GST Council in contrast to the example cited above,” the West Bengal Finance Minister in the letter said while urging Niramala Sitharaan to introspect the manner of the function of the GST Council.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Union Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has approved an agreement between the Republic of India and Saint Vincent and The Grenadines for the Exchange of Information and Assistance in Collection with respect to Taxes.
i) This is a new Agreement between the Republic of India and Saint Vincent and The Grenadines. There was no such agreement in the past between the two countries.
ii) Agreement mainly proposes to facilitate the exchange of information between the two countries and to provide assistance to each other in the collection of tax claims.
iii) Agreement also contains tax examination abroad provisions which provide that a country may allow the representatives of the other country to enter its territory (to the extent permitted under its domestic laws) to interview individuals and examine records for tax purposes.
Agreement between the Republic of India and Saint Vincent and The Grenadines will help in facilitating the exchange of information between the two countries including sharing of information held by the banks and other financial institutions encompassing the information regarding the legal and beneficial ownership. It will also facilitate the assistance in the collection of the tax claims between the two countries. Thus, it will strengthen India’s commitment to fighting offshore tax evasion and tax avoidance practices leading to the generation of unaccounted black money.
There was no such agreement with Saint Vincent and The Grenadines in the past and India was negotiating this agreement for a long time. Finally, Saint Vincent and The Grenadines agreed to conclude this agreement with India which will promote tax cooperation between the two countries through the exchange of information and assistance in the collection of outstanding tax claims between the two countries.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
Tax Inspectors Without Borders (TIWB), a joint initiative of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), launched its programme in Bhutan today. India was chosen as the Partner Jurisdiction and has provided the Tax Expert for this programme.
This programme is expected to be of about 24 months’ duration through which India in collaboration with the UNDP and the TIWB Secretariat aims to aid Bhutan in strengthening its tax administration by transferring technical know-how and skills to its tax auditors and through sharing of best audit practices. The focus of the programme will be in the area of International Taxation and Transfer Pricing.
Shri J.B. Mohapatra, Chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) attended the launch through videoconferencing along with Mr. NipudGyeltshen, the Officiating Director-General, Department of Revenue & Customs, Bhutan; Ms. RusudanKemularia, Head of the TIWB Secretariat; and other senior officers from Bhutan, UNDP, OECD, TIWB Secretariat, and Foreign Tax & Tax Research Division of CBDT.
This programme is another milestone in the continued cooperation between India and Bhutan and India’s continued and active support for South-South cooperation.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Institute of Company Secretaries of India (ICSI) notified the Form for Election to fill the casual vacancy of the Eastern India Regional Constituency of the 13th Council, 2021.
One member of the 13th Council of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India, elected from the Eastern India Regional Constituency (EIRC), tendered his resignation from the membership of the Council of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India on 12th December, 2020 and consequently, pursuant to sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Company Secretaries Act, 1980 one seat from Eastern India Regional Constituency became vacant w.e.f., 23rd December, 2020, the election for filling casual vacancy of the Eastern India Regional Constituency of the 13th Council.
In pursuance of Rules 9, 10 and 11 of the Rules, a member who is eligible and desirous to stand for election to the Council of the Institute from EIRC shall file nomination(s) in the form, so as to reach the Returning Officer, ‘ICSI House’ 22, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Delhi-110 003 not later than 6.00 PM on Friday, the 16th July, 2021 along with the statement, declaration, three passport size photographs and the demand drafts drawn in favour of the “Institute of Company Secretaries of India” payable at New Delhi, towards the fees of Rs. 40,000 plus GST and security deposits of Rs, 20,000.
The ICSI clarified that a member may file any number of nominations not exceeding ten for the election to the Council from EIRC and irrespective of the number of nomination(s) he has to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- plus GST along with the nomination.
The Panel for scrutiny of nominations shall comprise of Mr. S Santhanakrishnan, Government Nominee on the Council; Mr. Tharvinder Singh, Deputy Secretary, (PI Section), MCA- Nominated by Central Government and Mr. Asish Mohan, Returning Officer and Secretary, The Institute of Company Secretaries of India.
“In pursuance of sub-rules (1) and (2) of Rule 41 of the Rules, a candidate, whose name has been included in the final list of nominations under Rule 15, shall not incur an expense in excess of Rs. 7,00,000/- and shall file an account of expenses incurred for the election in the format within fifteen days of the notification issued under Rule 36,” the ICSI notified.
The notification said, “in pursuance of Rules 5, 21 and 28 read with Schedule 2 of the Rules, Polling Booths have been assigned to each voter. A voter may cast his vote at the polling booth assigned to him. A member, whose name is not shown under any Polling Booth, shall be permitted to vote by post. A list of Polling Booths has been published on the website of the Institute.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
A meeting was held between senior officials of the Finance Ministry and Infosys on 22.06.2021 on issues in the new Income Tax Portal. The meeting was presided over by Union Minister for Finance & Corporate Affairs Minister Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman. Union Minister of State for Finance & Corporate Affairs, Shri Anurag Singh Thakur, also participated in the meeting. The interaction was attended by Shri Tarun Bajaj, Secretary Revenue; Shri J. B. Mohapatra, Chairman, CBDT; Smt. Anu J. Singh, Member (L & Systems), CBDT, and other senior officers of CBDT. Infosys was represented by its MD & CEO, Shri Salil Parekh and COO, Shri Praveen Rao, and other members of their team. The meeting was also attended by 10 tax professionals from across the country, including representatives of ICAI and the All India Federation of Tax Practitioners (AIFTP).
The new e-filing portal 2.0 of the Income Tax Department (incometax.gov.in) went live on 07.06.2021. Since its launch, there were numerous glitches in the functioning of the new portal. Taking note of the grievances voiced on social media by taxpayers, tax professionals, and other stakeholders, the Finance Minister had also flagged the issues to the vendor M/s Infosys, calling upon them to address these concerns. However, since the portal continued to be plagued by technical glitches causing inconvenience to taxpayers, it was decided to hold a meeting between Finance Ministry and Infosys as also other stakeholders here today. Suggestions in respect of the glitches on the portal were invited online by 18.06.2021. More than 700 emails detailing over 2,000 issues including 90 unique issues/problems in the portal were received in response to the same.
During the meeting, Smt. Sitharaman emphasized that enhanced taxpayer service is an important priority for the present Government and every effort should be made to amplify the same. While appreciating the role of ICAI and its president Shri Jambusaria and the ICAI’s positive contribution in giving shape to today’s meeting, the Finance Minister complimented them for providing specific nuanced inputs lying between the intersection of technology and taxation. Smt. Sitharaman also expressed her gratitude to the people who sent inputs through email and assured them that their suggestions would be taken up in all earnestness and would be addressed on priority.
The Finance Minister exhorted Infosys (service provider) to work on the tax portal to make it more humane and user-friendly and expressed her deep concern on the various problems being faced by the stakeholders in the new portal which was expected to provide a seamless experience to taxpayers.
Smt. Sitharaman asked Infosys to address all issues without further loss of time, improve their services, redress grievances on priority as it was impacting taxpayers adversely. The Finance Minister concluded her remarks by appreciating the taxpayers who have kept up with the timelines of compliances despite the COVID-19 pandemic. Smt. Sitharaman also hoped that the positive engagement between taxpayers, tax professionals, and the Government would continue in the future. The Finance Minister assured them that the Government is responsive to their problems and is proactively committed to enhancing taxpayer service and experience.
The team from Infosys, which was led by the CEO and COO of Infosys, took note of the issues highlighted by the stakeholders. They also noted the observations and suggestions received from various users and stakeholders through email. The Infosys team acknowledged the technical issues in the functioning of the portal and shared the status of the resolution w.r.t the issues highlighted by the stakeholders. They informed that Infosys has been working to fix the technical issues noticed in the functioning of the portal and that they have augmented the resources for execution of the project on the hardware as well as the application side and that some of the issues have already been identified and fixed. For the other remaining technical issues, they assured that their teams were working on these issues and gave the expected timelines within which the issues such as e-proceedings, Form 15CA/15CB, TDS statements, DSC, viewing of past ITRs, etc. are expected to be resolved in about a week. It was also decided that the timelines mentioned by Infosys to redress the issues would also be placed in the public domain in due course.
This interaction was followed by another detailed meeting between senior officers of the Department of Revenue and the Infosys team, covering technical issues in the new portal.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
Finance Act, 2021 inserted two new sections 206AB and 206CCA in the Income-tax Act 1961 which takes effect from the 1st day of July 2021. These sections mandate tax deduction or tax collection at a higher rate in the case of certain non-filers (specified persons). The higher rate is twice the prescribed rate or 5%, whichever is higher.
To implement these two provisions, the tax deductor/collector was required to do the due diligence of satisfying himself if the deductee/collected is a specified person. This would have resulted in an extra compliance burden on such tax deductor/collector. To ease this compliance burden the Central Board of Direct Taxes has issued a new functionality “Compliance Check for Sections 206AB & 206CCA”. This functionality is already functioning through reporting portal of the Income-tax Department (https://report.insight.gov.in).
The tax deductor/collector can feed the single PAN (PAN search) or multiple PANs (bulk search) of the deductee/ coIIectee and can get a response from the functionality if such deductee/collectee is a specified person. For PAN Search, the response will be visible on the screen which can be downloaded in PDF format. For Bulk Search, the response would be in the form of a downloadable file that can be kept for record.
The logic of the functionality has been explained through CBDT Circular No. 11 of 2021 dated 21st June, 2021 available at (https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/communications/circular/circular_11_2021.pdf). The Circular has further eased the burden of the tax deductors/collectors by ensuring that the deductors/collectors need to check the PAN in the functionality at the beginning of the financial year without there being any need to check the PAN of the non-specified person again during that financial year.
With this new functionality, the Government has reiterated its commitment to ease the compliance burden of taxpayers.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs on Monday notified the appointment of Presidents of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under Section 415 of the Companies Act, 2013.
The Government has appointed Rajeswara Rao Vittanalla, Member (Judicial) shall act as President, NCLT with effect from June 1, 2021 and up to June 1, 2021 i.e. date of completion of his tenure as Member (Judicial).
Mr. Bethala Shantha Vijaya Prakash Kumar, Member (Judicial), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), has completed his tenure on May 31, 2021.
The MCA has further notified that consequent on the completion of the term of office of Shri Rajeswara Rao Vittanalla, Member (Judicial), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), on June 1, 2021, Ms. Manorama Kumari, Member (Judicial) shall act as President, NCLT with effect from June 2, 2021 and up to June 5, 2021 i.e. date of completion of her tenure as Member (Judicial).
“Consequent on the completion of the term of office of Ms. Manorama Kumari, Member (Judicial), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), on 05.06.2021, Shri R. Varadharajan, Member (Judicial) shall act as President, NCLT in terms of Section 415 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013) with effect from 06.06.2021 and up to 09.06.2021 [i.e. date of completion of his tenure as Member (Judicial)],” the notification read.
Lastly, on the completion of the term of office of Shri R. Varadharajan, Member (Judicial), National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), on 09.06.2021, Shri Bhaskara Pantula Mohan, Member (Judicial) shall act as President, NCLT in terms of Section 415 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013), for a period of three months with effect from 10.06.2021 or until a regular President is appointed or until further orders, whichever is earliest.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Government appointed the Economic Affair Secretary Ajay Seth as India’s Alternate Governor on the Board of Governors of African Development Bank (AFBD), Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), New Development Bank (NDB).
Ajay Seth replaced the earlier Alternative Governor of government Tarun Bajaj.
The Department of Economic Affairs said on Monday that the appointment of Ajay Seth is effective from 16th April 2021.
Seth, an Indian Administrative Service officer of the Karnataka Cadre’s 1987 batch, took charge as the new secretary of the department of economic affairs on 16 April. A mechanical engineer by training, Seth was Bangalore Metro Rail Corp. Ltd’s managing director for three years from July 2018, and is credited to have put the finances of the public sector unit in order.
In his previous stint in the finance ministry, Seth served as a deputy secretary and director in the department of expenditure and department of economic affairs between 2000 and 2004. He served as an adviser to the executive director of the Asian Development Bank in 2004-2008.
Recently, the central government has nominated economic affairs secretary Ajay Seth in the Ministry of Finance as a director on the Central Board of Reserve Bank of India. Seth will replace the earlier nominee of government Tarun Bajaj who has been appointed as the revenue secretary.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) ruled that 28% GST applicable on ‘Track assembly’, which is an accessory to Motor vehicles.
The applicant, Daebu Automotive Seat India Private Limited is a manufacturer of Seat Components and Accessories, which is added to the manufacturing of Full Seat of four-wheelers. The parent company which is situated in Korea is called DAS Corporation and they are engaged in the manufacture of automobile seats.
The applicant has submitted for clarity that they have requested for determination of the classification of only the finished goods viz., Track assembly meant for front Left/right. seat. The various sub-assemblies (which are also named in their typed set to their application) that go into making their product viz., Track assembly are essentially parts of the track assembly.
The applicant has sought the Advance Ruling in respect of the correct classification of goods manufactured by the applicant viz. “Automotive Seating System” and Will the goods manufactured fall under CH 87089900 attracting GST 28% or under CH 940199990 attracting GSTCv 18%.
The Coram of Kurinji Selvan V.S. and Senthil Velavan B observed that the product ‘Track Assembly’ manufactured and supplied by M/s. Daebu Automotive India Private Limited is classifiable under CTH 8708 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as applicable to GST as per Explanation (iii) to Notification 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dt 28.06.2017 and G.O. Ms No. 59, Commercial Taxes and Registration (B1) dt 29th June 2017.
The AAR ruled that The applicable rate of tax is 14% CGST as per entry Sl.No.170 of Schedule -IV of the Notification 1/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dt 28.06.2017 as amended and 14% SGST as per entry sl. No. 170 of Schedule-IV of Notification No. II(2)/CTR/532(d-4)/2017 vide G.O. (Ms) No. 62 dated 29.06.2017 as amended.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
In the major relief to the Godrej, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench deleted the Central Excise duties, penalties arising from a contract for retail packing of on ‘baby and clinical diapers’ and ‘sanitary napkins’.
The appellants namely Godrej Hygiene Products Ltd. and Y & Associates entered into the contract on 22nd June 2007 for retail packing of ‘baby and clinical diapers’ and ‘sanitary napkins’ that continued till June 2011. In accordance with the agreement, the M/s Godrej Hygiene Products provided ‘diapers’ and ‘packing material’ along with specifications to Y & Associates who were to undertake packing and storage with responsibility for compliance with legal prescriptions.
It was alleged that ‘baby diapers’ and ‘sanitary napkins’ were rendered liable to duties of central excise in notification no. 10/2010-CE dated 27th February 2010 by inserting these descriptions at serial no. 96B and serial no. 96C in notification no. 4/2006-CE dated 1st March 2006 despite which the goods were cleared without discharge of the levy arising therefrom.
M/s Y & Associates were held liable to duty of ₹ 1,26,51,977 for having undertaken ‘manufacture’ within the meaning of section 2(f)(iii) of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with the Third Schedule therein, along with interest thereon under section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1994, as well as to penalty of like amount under section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944 while M/s Godrej Hygiene Products Ltd was imposed with penalty of ₹ 25,00,000. The goods, valued at ₹ 4,30,25,400 that were cleared between 27th February 2010 and 30th June 2011, were confiscated but allowed to be redeemed on payment of a fine of ₹ 1,00,00,000. Hence these two appeals have been filed and which, owing to commonality of issues, are taken up for disposal in this proceeding.
Advocate Rajesh Ostwal, on behalf of the appellants contests coverage within the Third Schedule to Central Excise Act, 1944 sans which the components that make up ‘manufacture’ in section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944 are irrelevant in determining excisability
Mr. Ostwal further added that it was intended to be covered by section 2(f)(iii) of Central Excise Act, 1944 at serial no. 55 of the Third Schedule, is but that part of the description corresponding to heading no. 4818 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 which does not touch upon the impugned goods corresponding to tariff item no. 4818 4010 and 4818 4090 and others besides.
On the other hand the department urged that the appellants had not disputed either the imposition of the levy on the impugned goods with effect from 27th February 2010 or that the goods imported, in bulk by M/s Godrej Hygiene Products Ltd, were repacked into retail units by M/s Y & Associates.
The Coram of Judicial Member, Ajay Sharma, and Technical Member, C J Mathew held that a partial inclusion within the Third Schedule to Central Excise Act, 1944 does not justify the entire heading, of which such extraction is, undeniably, a part, to being legislatively intended as the extent to which ‘deemed’ manufacture can be stretched. Thus ‘baby diapers’ and ‘sanitary napkins’ are not ‘cleansing or facial tissues, handkerchiefs and towels of paper pulp, paper, cellulose wadding or webs of cellulose fibres’ in the Third Schedule to Central Excise Act, 1944.
The Tribunal said that impugned order has erred in not considering the scope of the legislative intent of ‘deemed’ manufacture of goods enumerated in the Third Schedule to Central Excise Act, 1944 and, on that fragile sustenance, the demand of duties and imposition of penalties does not have the wherewithal to survive
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT ) issued the Circular regarding the use of functionality under Section 206AB and 206CCA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Finance Act, 2021 inserted two new sections 206AB and 206CCA in the Income Tax Act 1961 which takes effect from 1 day of July 2021. These sections mandate tax deduction (section 206AB) or tax collection (section 206CCA) at higher rate in case of certain non-filers (specified persons) with respect to tax deductions (other than under sections 192, 192A, 194B, 194BB, 194LBC and 194N) and tax collections. The higher rate is twice the prescribed rate or 5%, whichever is higher. A specified person means a person who satisfies both the two conditions.
Firstly, he has not filed the returns of income for both of the two assessment years relevant to the two previous years immediately before the previous year in which tax is required to be deducted /collected. Two previous years to be counted are required to be those whose return filing date under sub-section (1) of section 139 has expired.
Secondly, the Aggregate of tax deducted at source and tax collected at source is rupees fifty thousand or more in each of these two previous years.
The CBDT observed that the tax deductor or the tax collector is required to do a due diligence of satisfying himself if the deductee or the collectee is a specified person. This can lead to extra compliance burden on such tax deductors or tax collectors.
To ease this compliance burden the Central Board of Direct Taxes is issuing a new functionality “Compliance Check for Sections 206AB & 206CCA”. This functionality is made available through reporting portal of the Income-tax Department.
The tax deductor or the collector can feed the single PAN (PAN search) or multiple PANS (bulk search) of the deductee or collected and can get a response from the functionality if such deductee or collected is a specified person. For PAN Search, the response will be visible on the screen which can be downloaded in PDF format. For Bulk Search, the response would be in the form of a downloadable file that can be kept for record.
A list of specified persons is prepared as of the start of the financial year 2021-22, taking previous years 2018-19 and 2019-20 as the two relevant previous years. The list contains the name of taxpayers who did not file a return of income for both assessment years 2019-20 and 2020-21 and have aggregate TDS and TCS of fifty thousand rupees or more in each of these two previous years.
During the financial year 2021-22, no new names are added in the list of specified persons. This is a taxpayer friendly measure to reduce the burden on tax deductors and collectors of checking PANS of non-specified persons more than once during the financial year.
The Board said that if any specified person files a valid return of income (filed & verified) for the assessment year 2019-20 or 2020-21 during the financial year 2021-22, his name would be removed from the list of specified persons. This would be done on the date of filing of the valid return of income during the financial year 2021-22. If any specified person files a valid return of income (filed & verified) for the assessment year 2021-22, his name would be removed from the list of specified persons. This will be done on the due date of filing of return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 or the date of actual filing of valid return (filed & verified) whichever is later.
If the aggregate of TDS and TCS, in the case of a specified person, in the previous year 2020-21, is less than fifty thousand rupees, his name would be removed from the list of specified persons. This would be done on the first due date under sub-section (1) of section 139 of the Act falling in the financial year 2021-22. For the financial year 2021-22 this due date of 31″ July 2021 has been extended to 30th Sept 2021. Belated and revised TCS & TDS returns of the relevant financial years filed during the financial year 2021-22 would also be considered for removing persons from the list of specified persons on a regular basis.
“The deductor or the collector may check the PAN for functionality at the beginning of the financial year and then he is not required to check the PAN of a non-specified person during that financial year. To illustrate, let us assume that a deductor has 10,000 vendors that he deals with. He can use the functionality in the bulk search mode and can get the result of all these 10,000 PANs at one go. Let us assume that the functionality has shown that out of these 10,000 PANs, 5 PANS are specified persons for the purposes of sections 206AB and 206CCA of the Act. Now with respect to the remaining 9,995 PAN, it is clear that they are not on the list of specified persons for that financial year. Since no new name would be added to the list of specified persons during the financial year, the deductor or collector can be assured that these 9,995PANs would remain outside the list of specified persons during that financial year. Thus, the deductor or collector need not check again with respect to these 9,995 PANS during that financial year. There are chances that the 5 PANs which are of specified persons may move out of the list during the financial year and for that, there will be a need to recheck at the time of making tax deduction or tax collection,” the Board added.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) issued the clarification on the applicability of the Dynamic Quick Response (QR) Code on B2C invoices.
The Board has issued the Notification No. 14/2020-Central Tax, dated 21st March 2020 which requires Dynamic QR Code on B2C invoice issued by taxpayers having aggregate turnover more than 500 crore rupees, w.e.f. 01.12.2020.
Further, vide notification No. 06/2021-Central Tax, dated 30th March 2021, the penalty has been waived for non-compliance with the provisions of notification No.14/2020 – Central Tax for the period from 01st December 2020 to 30th June 2021, subject to the condition that the said person complies with the provisions of the said notification from 1st July 2021. Further, various issues on the Dynamic QR Code have been clarified vide Circular No. 146/2/2021-GST, dated 23.02.2021.
The CBIC said in the circular, “Various references have been received from trade and industry seeking clarification on applicability of Dynamic Quick Response (QR) Code on B2C (Registered person to Customer) invoices and compliance of notification 14/2020-Central Tax, dated 21st March 2020 as amended. The issues have been examined and in order to ensure uniformity in the implementation of the provisions of the law across the field formations, the Board, in the exercise of its powers conferred under section 168(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, clarified the issues”.
The Board has clarified that any person, who has obtained a Unique Identity Number (UIN) as per the provisions of Sub-Section 9 of Section 25 of CGST Act 2017, is not a “registered person” as per the definition of the registered person provided in section 2(94) of the CGST Act 2017. Therefore, any invoice, issued to such a person having a UIN, shall be considered as an invoice issued for a B2C supply and shall be required to comply with the requirement of the Dynamic QR Code.
Given that UPI ID is linked to a specific bank account of the payee/ person collecting money, separate details of bank account and IFSC may not be provided in the Dynamic QR Code.
In cases where the payment is collected by some person, authorized by the supplier on his/ her behalf, the UPI ID of such person may be provided in the Dynamic QR Code, instead of the UPI ID of the supplier.
The Board said that wherever an invoice is issued to a recipient located outside India, for the supply of services, for which the place of supply is in India, as per the provisions of IGST Act 2017, and the payment is received by the supplier in foreign currency, through RBI approved mediums, such invoice may be issued without having a Dynamic QR Code, as such dynamic QR code cannot be used by the recipient located outside India for making payment to the supplier.
In cases, where the invoice number is not available at the time of digital display of dynamic QR code in case of over the counter sales and the invoice number and invoices are generated after receipt of payment, the unique order ID/ unique sales reference number, which is uniquely linked to the invoice issued for the said transaction, may be provided in the Dynamic QR Code for digital display, as long as the details of such unique order ID/ sales reference number linkage with the invoice are available on the processing system of the merchant/ supplier and the cross-reference of such payment along with unique order ID/ sales reference number are also provided on the invoice.
The Board has also clarified that the purpose of dynamic QR Codes is to enable the recipient/ customer to scan and pay the amount to be paid to the merchant/ supplier in respect of the said supply. When the part-payment for any supply has already been received from the customer/ recipient, in form of either advance or adjustment through voucher/ discount coupon etc., then the dynamic QR code may provide only the remaining amount payable by the customer/ recipient against “invoice value”. The details of the total invoice value, along with details/ cross-reference of the part- payment/ advance/ adjustment done, and the remaining amount to be paid, should be provided on the invoice.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai has granted a major relief to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries India Precision Tools Ltd, one of the World’s leading manufacturers of Gear Cutting Tools and Broaches.
The Tribunal was considering an issue whether the Company is eligible to avail credit in respect of the amount of service tax paid to the commission agents while paying commission.
Earlier, the department had rejected the appellant-Company’s request to allow cenvat credit on the service tax of commissions paid to commission agents in regard to sales promotion of their products stating that the same is a post manufacturing activity, for which credit is not available.
Shri M.N. Bharathi, the lawyer represented the appellant before the Tribunal submitted that the department has denied the credit alleging that it is post-manufacturing activity. He explained that such agents are appointed for marketing and promotion of their products and, therefore, it is covered by the definition of “input services”. He further relied upon the Final Order No.40867/2020, dated 28.10.2020 in the appellant’s own case passed by the Division Bench of the Tribunal.MitsubishiShri M.N. Bharathi, the lawyer represented the appellant before the Tribunal submitted that the department has denied the credit alleging that it is post-manufacturing activity. He explained that such agents are appointed for marketing and promotion of their products and, therefore, it is covered by the definition of “input services”. He further relied upon the Final Order No.40867/2020, dated 28.10.2020 in the appellant’s own case passed by the Division Bench of the Tribunal.
Allowing the plea of the appellant, the Tribunal bench comprising Judicial Member Sulekha Beevi C.S. held that “after hearing both sides, I am convinced that the issues stand covered by the decision in the appellant’s own case cited supra wherein the reasons have been discussed in detail. Following the same, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs if any.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ), Delhi Bench ruled that the manufacturer entitled to avail cenvat credit on port charges on the basis of the invoice issued for clearance of inputs from factory or depot.
The appellant, M/s Mammon Concast Pvt. Limited is a manufacturer of M. S. Billets, falling under Chapter sub-heading 72071920 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and is registered with the Central Excise Range, Bharatpur, vide Registration. The appellant was also availing the cenvat credit facility of input and input services, for the manufacture of their final product.
The appellant has taken cenvat credit of Rs.14,09,763/- during the period 2010-11 to 2012-13. In the course of the audit, it appeared to Revenue that the appellant has wrongly taken cenvat credit on the strength of improper document of input service, mainly for the reason that some of the invoices are not issued in their name but are issued in the name of the high sea seller who sold the goods to the appellant on high sea sale basis. On the demand made by the Superintendent pursuant to audit, the appellant took the stand to vide their letter, that they were eligible to take the credit disputed by the Revenue.
The Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abhishek Jaju assailing the impugned order urges that the Court below have erred in shutting their eyes due to the flow of transaction and the admitted facts. The appellant is a purchaser of inputs – melting scrap by way of subsequent sales i.e. when the goods are in transit.
The coram of Judicial Member Anil Choudhary found that admittedly the melting scrap purchased by the appellant on high sea sale is their input for manufacture of M.S. billets. Rule 9(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules provides that cenvat credit shall be taken by the manufacturer on the basis of the invoice issued by a manufacturer for clearance of inputs from his factory or depot or from the premises of the consignment agent of the said manufacturer or from any other premises from where the goods are sold by or on behalf of the said manufacturer.
“The scheme of the Act read with the Rules has to be read harmoniously. If something missing in the rules, the cenvat credit is available under the scheme of the Act, read with Rule 3 read with Rule 2(l) and (k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, the service tax credit cannot be denied for some gap left in the statute. Such interpretation will defeat the scheme of cenvat credit, leading to an anomalous situation. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances, I hold that appellant has rightly taken cenvat credit under dispute,” the CESTAT said while deleting the penalty.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Department of Finance notified that the Listed company required to maintain at least 5% of public shareholding as a result of the implementation of the resolution plan.
The government notified the Securities Contracts (Regulation) (Amendment) Rules, 2021 which seeks to amend the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957.
In the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957, in rule 19, in sub-rule (2), in clause (b), in sub-clause (iii), after the words “four thousand crore rupees”, the words “but less than or equal to one lakh crore rupees” shall be inserted.
In other words, At least ten per cent of each class or kind of equity shares or debentures convertible into equity shares issued by the company was offered and allotted to public in terms of an offer document if the post issue capital of the company calculated at offer price is more than four thousand crore rupees but less than or equal to one lakh crore rupees.
In rule 19, in sub-rule (2), in clause (b) after sub-clause (iii) and before the provisos, the following shall be inserted, namely “(iv) at least such percentage of each class or kind of equity shares or debentures convertible into equity shares issued by the company equivalent to the value of five thousand crore rupees and at least five per cent of each such class or kind of equity shares or debenture convertible into equity shares issued by the company, if the post issue capital of the company calculated at offer price is above one lakh crore rupees; Provided that the company referred to in this sub-clause (iv) shall increase its public shareholding to at least ten per cent within a period of two years and at least twenty-five per cent. within a period of five years, from the date of listing of the securities, in the manner specified by the Securities and Exchange Board of India.”
In rule 19A, in sub-rule (5), in the proviso, for the word “eighteen”, the word “twelve” shall be substituted and the proviso shall be inserted, namely, “Provided further that, every listed company shall maintain public shareholding of at least five per cent. as a result of implementation of the resolution plan approved under section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Hyderabad bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)has held that the sale consideration received by a real estate agent towards the sale of property shall be treated as business income for the purpose of taxation.
The Tribunal was hearing an appeal against an order where the Assessing Officer treated such income as a short-term capital gain.
In the instant case, the assessee was engaged in the business of executing real estate transactions and getting commission income. During the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer received information that the assessee has sold immovable property vide document no. 3291/2009 dated 05.10.2009 for a total consideration of Rs. 4,52,40,000/- (5OC value) and that the said property was purchased by the appellant vide document no. 1967/2209 for a consideration of Rs. 1,60,00,000/-. The Assessing Officer, based on the information, concluded the assessment proceedings where the assessee was asked to pay income tax under the head short-term capital gain.
Allowing the contentions of the assessee, the Tribunal bench consisting of Judicial Member S.S Godara and Accountant Member L P Sahu observed that the assessee is basically engaged in the business as a real estate agent in Hyderabad deriving commission income.
“The modus operandi of the business activity is that of identifying properties for sale in Hyderabad and simultaneously identify the interested buyers and sell the properties with a marginal profit. Further, the assessee is also engaged in sourcing properties for a commercial lease to derive commission income. The assessee sold a property for a consideration of Rs. 4,52,40,000/-,which was purchased by him at Rs. 1,60,00,000/-. The said consideration was treated by the AO as short-term capital gains on the ground that the assessee has failed to produce any corroborative evidence in support of that he is engaged in the business of executing real estate transactions and getting commission income. The CIT(A) directed the AO to treat the sale consideration received by the assessee on the sale of property under the head business income for giving detailed findings cited supra. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in directing the AO to treat the transaction of sale and purchase of property should be taxed under the head business income and upholding the order of CIT(A), we dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue on this issue,” the Tribunal said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
In a recent ruling, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed partial relief to the pharma giant, AstraZeneca India where the claim for refund in respect of service tax paid on hotel accommodation services and general insurance services were allowed in favor of the company.
The Company’s request to allow cenvat credit under various heads including hotel accommodation expenses, out-of-pocket expenses, and general insurance services was rejected by the department.
Allowing the plea of the Company, the Tribunal bench comprising Judicial Member Sulekha Beevi C.S found that the refund in respect of Hotel Accommodation Services is availed only for the benefit of the employees, and therefore, the same must be allowed in the light of the Company’s own case for the subsequent period.
“In regard to Out-of-Pocket Expenses, there are no sufficient documents showing the details of these expenses or the type of services that have been availed by the appellants. I am of the view that the appellant is not eligible for the refund of service tax paid on out-of-Pocket Expenses as they do not relate to any particular service,” the Tribunal said.
With regard to the General Insurance Services, the Tribunal found that the Company has produced documents to show that the premium has been borne by them and also to show that these are policies to meet the risk of payment of various legal benefits to employees.
“This said issue is covered by the decision in the case of M/s. ATP Tyres Vs. CGST & CE – 2021 (3) PMI 681 CESTAT- CHENNAI and M/s. CMR Engineering Ltd., – 2019 (8) TMI 748 – TELANGANA and ANDHRA PRADESH. Following the above decisions, I hold that the refunds in respect of the two services are eligible. The appeal is partly allowed. The impugned order is set aside to the effect of allowing the refund in respect of Hotel Accommodation Services and General Insurance Services only. Rejection of refund in respect of Out-of-Pocket Expenses is upheld. The appeal is partly allowed with consequential reliefs if any,” the Tribunal concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
In a significant ruling granting major relief to all the house-wives in the country, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Agra bench consisting of Judicial Member Lalit Kumar and the Accountant Member Dr. Mitha Lal Meena has ruled that cash deposit made by the housewives during the demonetization scheme 2016, cannot be subject to addition if such deposits are below Rs. 2.5 lakhs and such amount shall not be treated as income of the assessee.
The Tribunal was considering an appeal filed by a housewife, the assessee who deposited the cash of Rupees 211500 /-in our bank account during the demonetization period. It was the case of the assessee that the assessee had collected/ saved the above-said sum from her previous saving, given by her husband, son, relatives for the purposes of her and her family’s future.
“Women all over the country had been accumulating cash that they had saved for themselves from household budgets, by haggling with vegetable sellers, tailors, grocers, and assorted traders, years of stashing in whatever little cash gifts they received from relatives during festival times and years of tucking away the change they found in the pants that they washed every day, however suddenly they were left with no option but to deposit the amount in the denomination of Rs 500 and Rs 1000 notes in the banks on account of Demonetisation scheme 2016, these notes were no more legal tenders. Lots of concerns were raised by political and social organizations bring on fore the plight of women folks, on account of scheme of 2016.”
Allowing the appeal considering the facts in deep, the Tribunal observed that the assessee had duly explained the source of deposit i.e previous years saving and we have no hesitation to accept the same, as it would be presumed that this small amount of Rs 2,21, 000/ would have been accumulated or saved by her from various activities undertaken by her for and on behalf of the family in last many years.
“Further as mentioned hereinabove, in the decision of Kirti ( supra), women per se cannot be said to be not having income from any activities, as they are presumed to always been doing economic activities in the family for many years, hence in our view, the assessee had duly explained the source of her investment. Therefore no additions can be made by a lower authority. Further even if we ignore the explanation, for the sake of argument, then also it is for the assessing officer to bring on record some cogent evidence to prove that the amount deposited in the bank was undisclosed income arising from the business or from any other activities. No evidence has been brought on record by the lower authorities,” the Tribunal said.
Elaborating the invaluable contributions of the house-wives towards the growth of the country, the Tribunal said that this decision may be treated as a precedent in respect to proceedings arising out of the cash deposit made by the housewives during the demonetization scheme 2016, only up to the limit of Rs 2.5 lakhs only.
“The word “may” had been used by the statute under section 69A, as had been used by the statute under section 69 of the Income Tax Act 1961, therefore applying the same analogy as laid down by SC in the case of Smt. P.K. Noorjahan(supra), we are of the opinion that the amount deposited by the assessee during the demonetization. Cannot be treated as income of the assessee. Hence the appeal of the assessee is allowed,” the Tribunal said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
The Orissa High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to journalists accused of cheating depositors through Ponzi schemes.
The petitioner, Suman Chattopadhyay is a journalist who earlier happened to be the Director and shareholder of Disha Productions & Multimedia Pvt. Ltd. (DPMPL). As reported, he ceased to be the share-holder and Director of DPMPL in January 2013, and presently he is continuing as the Chief Editor of ‘Ae Samay’, a Bengali newspaper. He was arrested in another case registered in Odisha against another Ponzi Company, namely “I-Core E-Services Ltd.”, and in that connection during a search conducted in his residential premises, some documents were found out to show his relationship with and diversion of funds from M/s. Saradha Group of Industries to DPMPL, of which he earlier happened to be the Director and share-holder, and subsequent misappropriation of an amount of Rs.1.04 Crore.
Ponzi Companies, many in number, flourished in the Eastern States of India, basically in Odisha, West Bengal, Assam, Tripura, and Bihar, which instigated the public through different schemes, to deposit/invest money, with false assurance of impressive returns. Being allured by such lucrative assurance, lacs of gullible depositors parted with their hard-earned money with those Ponzi firms, who though at the initial stage paid some returns, later on after collecting huge amounts of money from the public, disappeared from the scene to the dismay and detriment of the depositors.
Mr.Debasish Panda, counsel appearing for the petitioner while urging for the anticipatory bail submitted, inter-alia, that since the petitioner was earlier examined by the Investigating Agency in connection with certain cases of Saradha Group registered at Kolkata, and on those occasions, he was not thought necessary or proper to be taken to custody, it would be a futile exercise for the C.B.I. to arrest him in connection with the present case which is also in connection with Saradha Group.
According to Mr.Panda, the entire transaction of the petitioner with Saradha Group was nothing but a business deal having no element of criminality, and the C.B.I. is already in possession of all the connected documents of such business transaction.
Mr. Sarthak Nayak, counsel appearing for the C.B.I. while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner urged that Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential to know as to whether any other benefits have been received by him from Saradha Group and other Ponzi companies, whether there has been a diversion of money from Saradha Group to any other influential persons directly or indirectly, whether there were other patrons of Saradha Group, whether the petitioner has diverted his ill-gotten money to anybody else, etc.
Mr. Nayak further added that being a media person the petitioner is in contact
with many influential persons, and there is every chance of his tampering with evidence and threatening or influencing material witnesses, and not cooperating with the investigation.
The single-judge bench of Justice S. Pujahari noted that since in this case the petitioner has been indicted in an economic offense which is of serious in nature and the larger angle of conspiracy with regard to the patronage of political and other persons in the growth of such Ponzi firms are required to be unearthed.
The court while rejecting the bail said that no effective investigation can be made by the police by enlarging the petitioner on pre-arrest bail, even if he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation by remaining on pre-arrest bail.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
Infosys has invited applications from qualified Chartered Accountants ( CA ). Infosys Limited is an Indian multinational information technology company that provides business consulting, information technology, and outsourcing services.
Responsibilities
• Financial review of overseas operations and subsidiaries • Handling audit queries and corporate tax issues • Review of monthly performance • Preparation of Budgets/Planning • Review of systems • Cost Control and MIS Reporting
Educational Requirements
Chartered Accountant
Service Line
Finance
Technical and Professional Requirements:
Qualified Chartered Accountant with 0 to 4 years of experience, post CA .
Preferred Skills:
Business Finance->Chartered Accountancy->Financial Planning & Analysis
Domain->Finance->Accounting & Reporting.
For more details Click here.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
