Sale of Goods by Importer to Another not Legally Prohibited: CESTAT quashes Penalty [Read Order]

The CESTAT, Chennai bench has held that there is no prohibition on the selling of goods by the importer to another to attract proceedings under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The department, under an impression that the appellant, M/s Freight Link Logistics, was trying to evade customs duty, initiated proceedings. Show cause notice…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

Delhi HC allows Income Tax Deduction of Payment of Bonus by Company to Director: Directs Dept to follow Rule of Consistency [Read Order]

A division bench of the Delhi High Court has allowed the deduction of payment of bonus by a Company to its Directors by directing the income tax department to follow the rule of consistency. The department, while concluding the assessment proceedings against the Company, M/s BMO Advisors Pvt. Ltd, observed that no justification was given…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

Cabinet approves Bilateral MoU between SEBI and Manitoba Securities Commission, Canada

The Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has approved the signing of Bilateral Memorandum of Understanding between Securities and Exchange Board of India and Manitoba Securities Commission, Canada.

Benefits:

Impact:      

Entities located in the province of Manitoba, Canada are desirous of registration as Foreign Portfolio Investor (FPI) with SEBI, for which one of the pre-conditions is that the securities market regulator of a foreign country / province should be a signatory to the International Organization of Securities Commissions’ Multilateral memorandum of Understanding (IOSCO MMoU), signing a bilateral MoU with SEBI is essential for permitting entities from Manitoba to be registered as FPI with SEBI.  Around twenty Manitoba-=domiciled FPIs with total Assets Under Custody of Rs.2,665 crore are expected to benefit by signing of this bilateral MoU and would be eligible to continue investing in the Indian markets.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Manager vacancy in Citigroup

The Citigroup has invited applications for the post of Trade Working Capital Finance – Sr Development Manager.

Responsibilities:

Qualifications:

For more details and to apply, click here:

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

GE Healthcare hiring Chartered Accountants

The GE Healthcare has invited applications for the post of Sr FP & A Staff Manager.

Responsibilities:

Qualifications:

For more details and to apply, click here:

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Provisional Attachment shall not Hamper Regular Business: Gujarat High Court [Read Order]

A division bench of the Gujarat High Court has held that the provisional attachment under the Central GST Act, 2017 shall not be enforced in such a way as to hamper the normal business of the assessee. The writ petitioner/assessee is in the business of manufacturing and selling ingots, having a factory situated near Rajkot,…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

B. Com, CA inter, CMA inter vacancy in DuPont

The DuPont has invited application for the post of Accounts Payable Reconciliation Specialist.

Responsibilities:

Qualifications:

Location: Hyderabad

For more details and to apply, click here:

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Re-Assessment at the behest of Audit Party is Invalid: Bombay High Court [Read Order]

A division bench of the Bombay High Court has held that the re-assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law since the same was at the behest of audit party. Petitioner is a company engaged in the business, inter alia, of air conditioning and refrigeration etc. the petitioner received…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

Sale and Manufacture are Inter-Connected: Manufacturer eligible to avail Cenvat Credit on Sales Commission, rules CESTAT [Read Order]

The CESTAT, Kolkata bench has held that since the sale and manufacture are inter-connected, the cenvat credit is available on the amount of sales commission.

The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of water, aerated water, fruit pulp-based drinks, Beverages in Bag (BIB), etc. The Appellant had entered into an agreement with M/s Nicco Parks and Resorts Ltd. for the sale of their products from the latter’s premises by paying them an upfront fee. The scrutiny revealed that the Appellant availed cenvat credit of service tax paid on invoices raised by M/s Nicco Parkland Resorts Ltd. towards the sales commission.

The department issued a show-cause notice observing that the credit availed by the appellant-assessee being sales commission in nature, does not qualify as eligible input services credit as per the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of M/s Cadila Healthcare Ltd.

Shri P.K.Choudhary, Member(Judicial) found that the sales commission is directly attributable to sales of the products.

“Any activity which amounts to sale of the products is deemed to be sales promotion activity in the normal trade parlance. The commission is paid on sales of the products/services with an intention to boost the Company. The commission paid on sales becomes part of sales promotion resulting in increased manufacturing activity. The sales commission has a direct nexus with the sales, which in turn is related to the manufacture of the products. If there is no sale, there would not be any need to manufacture the products. Be that so as it may, to increase the manufacturing activity an encouragement is being given by way of sales commission for achieving increased sales,” the Tribunal said.

Relying on the decision of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana Vs. Ambika Overseas it was held that the sale and manufacture are directed inter-related and the commission paid on sales needs to be accounted for as services related to sales promotion.

“Further, I follow the ratio of the decision of the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Essar Steel India Ltd. cited supra, wherein the Tribunal, after discussing all the previous cases and Rules of interpretation, have held that the “Explanation” inserted in Rule 2 (l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 vide Notification No.2/2016-CE (N.T.) dated 03.02.2016 is declaratory in nature and is applicable retrospectively,” the Tribunal concluded.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Issuance of ‘C’ Forms: Delhi HC slams Govt. says Helplessness cannot be Pleaded for Inability of the System [Read Order]

A division bench of the Delhi High Court has directed to issue ‘C’ Forms for 2016-17 where assessment for 2016-17 was finalized and purchases accepted but the application for issuance of ‘C’ Forms was rejected saying that system does not allow it as the Sales against ‘C’ Forms was not filled in the column prescribed.

The petitioner, is a registered dealer under the CST Act, had purchased goods in the course of interstate transactions against “C” Forms. By virtue of Section 8(4) of the CST Act, the respondent is obliged to issue Form “C” in respect of the purchases made on the strength of his Registration Certificate under CST Act.

Justice Mukta Gupta and JusticeNeena Bansal Krishnaobserved that the sole reason for declining the Form “C” is not that the petitioner is not entitled but merely that the system does not permit the downloading of “C” Form.

“Rule 5(4) (i) of the CST Delhi Rules is not attracted in the facts of this case. There was no failure on the part of the Petitioner to furnish a return, including reconciliation return or return in accordance with the provisions of law or in payment of tax due according to such return. In fact, the tax demand was “Nil” and there was no loss on account of Tax revenue to the Department,” the Court said.

While concluding, the bench added that “While in present day and age, technology has immensely facilitated the business transactions but it cannot be permitted to take over completely and prevent the genuine entitlements of the petitioner to be denied merely on the technical ground that the system does not so permit. The systems have been created purely for facilitating and simplifying the business transactions and cannot be self defeating. The respondent cannot plead its helplessness on the ground of the system not enabling it to do so. Once the petitioner is held to be entitled to “C” Form, the same cannot be denied for technical or administrative reasons as has been observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision of State of H.P. v. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. (2005) 6 SCC 499. 20. The Writ petition is accordingly allowed and the respondent is directed to furnish the Form “C” for the Financial Year 2016-2017 to the petitioner within 3 months.”

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Sufficiency or Correctness of Material based on which Re-Assessment is Initiated need not be considered during Issue of Notice: Delhi HC [Read Order]

The Delhi High Court has held that the sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at the stage of issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The department has initiated re-assessment proceedings against the assessee by holding that despite the aforesaid receipts the assessee had not filed any return of income for the Assessment Years 2016-17 & 2017-18 and the said receipts had not been offered to tax by the assessee. It is further stated in the impugned order that the plea of the petitioners’-assessee is covered under Para 1(B)(iii)(c) of the CBDT instruction regarding selection of potential cases for issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act issued vide F. No. 225/40/2021/ITA-II dated 15 March, 2021 were issued to the petitioner under Section 148 on the ground that the assessee’s transactions for the Financial Years 2015-16 & 2016-17 were flagged in the Non-Filers Monitoring System (NMS). As per Form 15CA, the assessee had made a remittance to its head office without deducting TDS thereof and claimed the same to be tax free as per DTAA between India and USA.

While disposing the writ petitions, Justice Manmohan and Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma observed that Section 148 notices have been issued within four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Years.

“Also no scrutiny assessment has been taken place in the present cases. Consequently, the test to be applied for re-assessment in the present cases is whether there is ‘reason to believe’ that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer, Centre Circle XI, Range Bombay and Ors., (2008) 14 SCC 218, the Supreme Court has held that the expression ‘reason to believe’ means that there is some prima facie material on the basis of which the Department can reopen the case. The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at the stage of issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act,” the Court said.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

No Leniency since Assessee misappropriated Government Money: CESTAT [Read Order]

The CESTAT, Chandigarh bench has held that there cannot be any leniency since the assessee has misappropriated the government money.

The appellant challenged the impugned order wherein the penalties have been imposed under section 112 (a) and section 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 for alleged preparation of fake TR-6 challans showing payment of customs duty which actually was not paid by the appellant.

Before the Tribunal, the appellant submitted that the appellant was working under the guidance of Shri Varun Mahajan and is a very poor person and he has done this act on the direction of his master. Therefore, for the act of master, he cannot be penalized.

Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) observed that this is case of preparing fake TR-6 challans showing payment of customs duty which actually was not paid by the appellant. The appellant has admitted the guilty at the time of recording his statement.

Diving deeply into the facts of the case, the Tribunal held that “As there is corroboration in the statement of the appellant that the appellant has shared money foregone for non-payment of customs duty with Sh. Varun Mahajan, in that circumstance, the appellant isnot entitled to any leniency from this Tribunal as the appellant misappropriated the government money. In that circumstance, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order for imposing penalties and the same is upheld.”

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Depreciation allowable on Marketing Information and Non-Compete Fee: ITAT [Read Order]

The Mumbai bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the depreciation is allowable on intangible assets such as marketing information comprising of Commercial information, Customer data, Distribution network and Suppliers contract and Non-compete fees. The assessee, Chemetall Rai India Limited, acquired Chemical business of Gramos Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. vide agreement…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

Kerala GST Dept issues Instructions for Detention of Undervalued Goods during Conveyance [Read Circular]

The Kerala Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) department has issued instructions for the detention of goods during transportation on grounds of undervaluation.

The instructions are issued in the light of the recent Kerala High Court judgment wherein the goods belonging to the petitioner were detained in a parcel godown by the Intelligence Squad on the ground that the value quoted in the invoice that accompanied the goods was low when compared to the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) and that the HSN code of the goods was wrongly entered.

While disposing of the above case, the  High Court found that there is no provision under the Goods and Services Tax Act that mandates that the goods shall not be sold at prices below the MRP declared thereon. Also, there is nothing in the GST MOV-06 detention order to show that, on account of the wrong classification, there was any difference in the rate of tax adopted by the assessee.

“In the light of the above-said facts and in compliance with the direction of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WP(C). No. 30798 of 2019 (Y) dated. 18.11.2019, all concerned are hereby directed not to detain or issue any Show Cause Notice to the goods under transport or stored in parcel agencies, raising the sole reason for undervaluation of the goods compared to the Maximum Retail Price (MRP),” the circular issued on Wednesday said.

“If any undervaluation cases are suspected in such cases, the officers are directed to upload the details of such invoices using the option provided in the Mobile App and send a report to the jurisdictional Officer, marking a copy to the jurisdictional district Joint Commissioner. Further, the intelligence squads shall gather evidence to establish the case by collecting documents about the actual value of the supply. The jurisdictional officer concerned shall verify the same with the help of the report and the uploaded details. Thereafter, the jurisdictional officer of the taxpayer vertical or the Intelligence formation can take further action as provided in the law,” the circular added.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Best Retirement Plans to Consider

Trying to find the right retirement plan can be as difficult as finding the right horse to bet on in the Kentucky Derby 2022. With many options to choose from, it can be hectic and somewhat confusing to know which ones work best.

Depending on your situation, one plan could help you out more than another. Below you can see which plan might be best for your personal needs.

Defined Contribution

These plans have been around since 1980 and still include some 401(k)’s (more on that later). In 2019 alone there were roughly 86 percent of Fortune 500 companies still offering these plans.

These plans slightly differ from traditional 401(k)’s and might offer something closer to pensions. Depending on the company you work for, this will potentially be more unique than other offers.

401(k) Plans

401(k)’s are a great tax advantage plan to help boost your retirement savings. Traditional 401(k)’s are for pre-tax earnings that are taxed after you withdraw them.

Roth 401(k)’s are after tax contributions, which means you do not get taxed on them when you are retired. The only downside is that you have to be over 59.5 years of age to take advantage of both opportunities to withdraw from them.

403(b) Plans

403(b) plans are very similar to 401(k)’s, but these are offered to school teachers or workers, various charities and other ventures. You would need to contribute pre-tax money and the income will grow tax free.

Once you are retired at 59.5 years of age, you can begin to withdraw them and it is treated as ordinary income. This plan is unique as it can only be offered by certain careers.

457(b) Plans

These plans are another similar offering like the 401(k). However, they are only offered to employees of state, local government, or for a variety of tax-exempt entities.

This plan mirrors the others mentioned, as you contribute pre-tax money and withdraw at a later date. The money grows tax-free and will be taxed as ordinary income at the time of withdrawal.

Traditional and Roth IRA

IRA’s are a great vehicle for your retirement and the two most popular are Traditional and Roth. You can only contribute $6,000 each year under 50 years of age.

Traditional IRA’s are similar to others mentioned above, meaning you have to contribute pre-tax dollars and will be taxed upon the withdrawal of them in retirement. The opposite is the Roth, which you contribute after tax dollars and will not be taxed upon withdrawal in retirement.

In some cases, you can roll over an IRA from a previous employer to another. These create tax advantages without having to disrupt your nest egg.

Traditional Pensions

This plan is considered a defined benefit plan, which is arguably the easiest to manage. Pensions are fully supplied by certain employers that offer them and they give you a fixed amount of money each month during your retirement.

These are rare these days, as most companies are not supporting the idea anymore of funding a large amount of an account to lay you out for life. This number has dropped significantly by 59 percent since 1998.

Guaranteed Income Annuities

Individuals can essentially create their own pensions these days by buying into these plans. If you know exactly when you want to retire, then this plan might work for you.

The only issue is, if you plan on working later in your life, this plan might not be worth it for you. The same advantages apply to after-tax contributions,so there are benefits in that regard.

Federal Thrift Savings Plan

This plan is similar to 401(k)’s but is a bit more aggressive. This is exclusive to government employees and uniformed servicemen and women.

These typically are fixed income and low cost investment options. In addition, it is one of the easier and simple investment options without having to think too hard about your retirement.

The investment grows by how much you plan to contribute. Obviously the more you invest with any plan the better off you will be.

Capital Gain Exemption u/s 54F not available for Purchase of ‘Office Premises’: ITAT [Read Order]

The Pune bench of the ITAT has held that the capital gain exemption under section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not available if the sale consideration is used to purchase ‘office premises’. While computing the capital gain, the assessee claimed, exemption u/s 54F of the Act amounting to Rs.16,03,920/-; deduction towards the…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

CA, CMA vacancy in Bank of America

The Bank of America has invited applications for the post of Assistant Manager.

Responsibilities:

Qualifications:

Location: Mumbai / Gurugram

For more details and to apply, click here:

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

Accounts Trainee vacancy in IFFCO

The Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd (IFFCO) has invited applications for the post of Trainee (Accounts).

Qualifications:

Training Period: One year

Upper Age limit:  30 yrs. as on 01st February, 2022 (relaxable by 5 years for SCs/STs and by 3 years for OBCs)

Location:  At any of the IFFCO Plants / Marketing Offices located PAN India. However, the position is transferable in any of the existing or future establishments of IFFCO or its subsidiaries at any time.

For more details and to apply, click here:

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

IBBI notifies Voluntary Liquidation Process Amendment Regulations, 2022 [Read Notification]

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India has notified the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Voluntary Liquidation Process) (Amendment) Regulations, 2022, shall be applicable with effect from 5th April 2022.

The notification said that the liquidator shall endeavor to complete the liquidation process of the corporate person and submit the Final Report under regulation 38 within: – (a) two hundred and seventy days from the liquidation commencement date where the creditors have approved the resolution under clause (c) of sub-section (3) of section 59 or clause (c) of sub-regulation (1) of regulation 3 and (b) ninety days from the liquidation commencement date in all other cases.

As per the notified amended rules, the liquidator shall submit the Final Report and the compliance certificate in Form-H along with the application under sub-section (7) of section 59 to the Adjudicating Authority.

The amended form-H is also notified by the Board.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.    

CBDT notifies Constitution of Dispute Resolution Committee for Income Tax Disputes [Read Notification]

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has notified the constitution of the Dispute Resolution Committee for income tax disputes under section 245MA read with section 295 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Budget 2021, the Minister of Finance has proposed the formation of a Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC) in order to provide quick…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now

Delay in Processing Income Tax Refund: Bombay HC slams Income Tax Dept for causing Unnecessary Hardships to Taxpayers [Read Order]

The Bombay High Court has recently criticized the income tax department and the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) for not processing the income tax refund claims within the prescribed time frame causing unnecessary hardships to the taxpayers. A bench of Justice K.R. Shriram and Justice N.R. Borkar was considering an appeal filed by the…

Your free access to Taxscan has Expired

To read the article, get a premium account.

Taxscan Premium

Why should you subscribe?
  • Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements
  • Receive Daily newsletters
  • Receive realtime Telegram/Whatsapp news updates
  • Download original Judgements / Order / Notifications / Circulars, etc
  • Enjoy exclusive entry fees to Simplified series. (Webinars, Seminars, masterclasses, etc.)
  ₹1199 + GST for 1 year

Subscribe Now