The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has notified a new Rule 11UAC in the Income Tax Rules, 1962 which provided that provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act shall not be applicable to any immovable property received by a resident of the unauthorized colony.
The Newly inserted Rule 11UAC reads that, “The provisions of clause (x) of sub-section (2) ofsection56 shall not apply to any immovable property, being land or building or both, received by a resident of an unauthorised colony in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, where the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette, regularised the transactions of such immovable property based on the latest Power of Attorney, Agreement to Sale, Will, possession letter and other documents including documents evidencing payment of consideration for conferring or recognising right of ownership or transfer or mortgage in regard to such immovable property in favour of such resident”.
Section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides that where any person “receives” any specified “property” (which includes shares and securities without consideration or for a consideration which is less than its fair market value, as determined in accordance with the applicable rules, then, the Tax FMV (where the property is received without consideration) or the excess of the Tax FMV over the consideration paid would be subject to tax in the hands of the recipient of “property” as “income from other sources”.
The Newly inserted rule will be applicable from April 1st, 2020.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentFighting the menace of Black Money stashed in offshore accounts is a key priority area for the Government of India. Following the agreement between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Swiss President Mr Ueli” Maurer for enhanced cooperation in the fight against tax evasion, the two sides have worked closely for expeditious information exchange in tax matters.
To further this cooperation, Revenue Secretary Dr Ajay Bhushan Pandey and Switzerland’s State Secretary for International Finance Ms Daniela Stoffel met here today. The Secretaries expressed satisfaction over the progress made over the past few years in the area of administrative assistance in tax matters, particularly the efforts made by Switzerland in providing assistance in HSBC cases.
Welcoming the first transmission of financial account information on an automatic basis between the two countries in September 2019, the Secretaries reiterated their countries’ commitment to global tax transparency for tackling offshore tax evasion. This automatic exchange of financial account information will usher a new era of financial transparency as Indian tax administration will now know the details of all bank accounts held by Indians in Switzerland. The Secretaries encouraged the competent authorities of both countries to further collaborate and share experiences with the aim of continuously enhancing the quality of the exchanged data.
The Revenue Secretary and Swiss State Secretary also exchanged views on addressing the challenges arising out of digitalisation of the economy and agreed that coordinated international actions, as in the case of tax base erosion and profit shifting project, are central to achieving a consensus-based long-term solution that leads to desired tax certainty and sustainable development.
The Secretaries reaffirmed the need for continuous dialogue at the level of competent authorities of the two countries to further enhance the cooperation under the India-Switzerland tax treaties and agreed to carry forward the dialogue in the spirit of mutual friendship and cooperation.
A Joint Statement was signed by the two Secretaries at the conclusion of the meeting.
The Kerala Authority for Advance Ruling in an application filed by M/s Travancore Cocotuft Pvt Ltd held that PVC tufted coir mats and mattings shall be chargeable to a GST of 12%
The applicant is a manufacturer and exporter of PVC tufted of it and mattings. The manufacturing activity is fully mechanized. The applicant seeks a ruling of the present authority on the rate applicable on the PVC tufted coir mats and mattings.
The Bench constituting of members B.G. Krishnan and B.S. Thyagarajababu while referring to an earlier decision of the present forum of Advance Ruling No. KER/31/2019 dated 1.03.2019 ruled that PVC Tufted Mats and Matting shall not be covered by the heading mentioning textile of coir and floor coverings covered under HSN 5702, 5703 and 5705. Further, it was held that if PVC/rubber are stuffed on the textile of coir used as floor mats, it shall fall under the Customs Tariff Head 5703 90 90 and will be taxed at 12%.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Kerala Authority of Advance Rulings in an application filed by M/s Square One Homemade Treats while prescribing the rates applicable on different items on bakery products held that resale of food and bakery products are not restaurant services.
The applicant is engaged in the business of reselling pre-packed food products like cakes, baked items like cookies, brownies, ready to eat homemade packed food, ready to eat snacks, hot and cold beverages through dispensing machine. In the bakery premises, they have provided a table for customers who like to eat food items procured from the counter.
An advance ruling is sought on (1) whether resale of food and bakery products fall under restaurant services and (2) whether the classification of HSN and Tax rates are done by the applicant is correct or not.
The Bench of Authority constituting of members B.G. Krishnan and B.S. Thagarajababu held the following:
With respect to the first issue, it was held that resale of food and bakery products does not fall under restaurant services. The Authority differentiate between the services provided by a restaurant and a bakery wherein, in the latter, ready to eat items are sold.
With respect to the second issue, the Authority classifies different products under different Schedules. It provides for the classification of Sweets, Chappathi, Coconut Chutney Powder, etc. specifically by providing the rate applicable on each of the specified item.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Income Tax Department conducted search action under the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the case of a group of trusts that are running educational institutions in and around Chennai for the past thirty years. The institutes run by the group include a number of engineering colleges, polytechnic institutes, dental college, nursing colleges, hospitals & schools. The group has interests in other sectors like the fishing harbour, cement, milk, bottled water and iron & steel etc.
There were reports of the group accepting fee/donations in cash, which were largely unaccounted and of the funds of the trust being diverted to other sister concerns. The action began on 7/11/2019 covering 32 premises in and around Chennai. During the search proceedings, evidence of suppression of fee receipts has been found. In addition, one group entity has adopted the modus operandi of showing the actual fees received as ‘advance fee collection’ in the liability side of the balance sheet and advancing the said amounts as payments, mainly, to its sister concerns against certain expenses/purchases, which were found to be inflated/ bogus. Thus, the money of the trusts is found to be diverted outside the trusts for the objects outside the scope of Trust.
Apart from the above, evidence has been found of unexplained cash debits, unrecorded cash expenditure, suppression of sale receipts in fishing harbour, loans advanced in cash, non-disclosure of income from the sale of property etc. Cash of approximately Rs. 5 crore and Jewelry of more than about Rs. 3 crore was seized in the said action. The preliminary estimate of the undisclosed income of the group detected so far is more than Rs. 350 crore. The search proceedings have been temporarily concluded and investigations into the findings are in progress.
The Income Tax Department carried out searches in the first week of November, 2019 on a group of persons indulging in issuing bogus bills and carrying on hawala transactions. The search operations covered 42 premises across Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Erode, Pune, Agra & Goa.
The search operations resulted in busting of a major racket of cash generation by leading corporate houses in the infrastructure sector through bogus contracts/bills. Funds meant for public infrastructure projects were siphoned off through entry operators, lobbyists and hawala dealers. The companies involved in siphoning off funds are mostly located in NCR and Mumbai. One such company was earlier searched by the Income Tax Department in April 2019.
The projects involved in bogus billings are a major infrastructure and EWS projects located in Southern India. Evidence of cash payment of more than Rs. 150 crore to a prominent person in Andhra Pradesh has also been unearthed during the search.
The search action was successful in unearthing incriminating evidence and establishing the nexus between big corporates, hawala operators and identification of the entire chain of delivery, as well as siphoning of funds by way of bogus contracts to the tune of Rs. 3300 crore. Unexplained cash of Rs 4.19 crore and jewellery in excess of Rs 3.2 crore was also seized during the search operation.
The Ministry of Finance has invited Suggestions from the Industry and Trade Associations for Budget 2020-21 regarding changes in direct and indirect taxes.
The Ministry has invited suggestions for changes in the duty structure, rates and broadening of tax base on both direct and indirect taxes giving economic justification for the same.
The Finance Ministry said that, suggestions and views may be supplemented and justified by relevant statistical information about the production, prices, revenue implication of the changes suggested and any other information to support your proposal. The request for correction of inverted duty structure, if any for a commodity, should necessarily be supported by value addition at each stage of manufacturing of the commodity. It would not be feasible to examine suggestions that are either not clearly explained or which are not supported by adequate justification/statistics.
The Ministry asked to sent suggestions and views may be emailed, as a word document in the form of separate attachments, in respect of Indirect Taxes [Customs and Central Excise [for commodities outside GST)] to budget-cbec@nic.in and Direct Taxes to ustp13@nic.in. Hard copies of the Pre-Budget proposals/ suggestions relating to Customs & Central Excise may be addressed to Shri G. D. Lohani, Joint Secretary (TRU-I), CBIC, while the suggestions relating to Direct Taxes may be addressed to Shri K. C. Varshney, Joint Secretary, Tax Policy and Legislation (TPL-I), CBDT. It would be appreciated if your views and suggestions reach us by the 21st of November 2019.
The Delhi High Court has directed Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) department to either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the Form TRAN-1 electronically or to accept the same manually on or before 20.11.2019.
The petitioner contended that, it is engaged in the business of trading of steel pipes and is registered under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. Before the introduction of the GST Act, as on 30.06.2017, the petitioner had a closing stock of pipes purchased from M/s Avon Steel Industries Private Limited of Rs. 71,35,431/- inclusive of excise duty of Rs.7,92,826/-. Petitioner was entitled to the transition of credit of the amount of Excise duty in terms of Section 140 (iii) of the GST Act. In order to avail transition of credit, petitioner was required to submit a declaration in Form TRAN-1 on the GST Portal within the stipulated period of 90 days. Since a large number of taxpayers could not complete the process within the aforesaid period on account of technical glitches and difficulties faced by them, the government extended the time period for filing TRAN-1 several times and lastly on the recommendation of GST Council, it was extended up to 27.12. 2017.
The Petitioner also submitted that, Pursuant to the aforesaid extension, the petitioner filed Form TRAN-1 on the common portal before the deadline. However, it was unable to log in to the common portal between 24.12.2017 to 27.12.2017 and avail transition of credit, presumably because of low bandwidth, given the fact that a large number of assessees all over India were trying to submit the declaration in Form TRAN-1 before the last date i.e. on 27.12.2017. Petitioner has annexed the screenshot of the Form TRAN-1, available on the common portal along with the petition.
The division bench comprising of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Sanjeev Narula has said that, “the factual position in the present case is not any different and thus, we allow the present petition and direct the respondents to either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the Form TRAN-1 electronically or to accept the same manually on or before 20.11.2019”.
The Court also directed to process the petitioner’s claim in accordance with law once the GST Form TRAN–1 is filed.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Staff Selection Commission ( SSC ) has invited application from CA, ICWA candidates for the posts of Assistant Audit Officer and Assistant Accounts Officer.
Staff Selection Commission will hold the Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2019 for filling up of various Group “B” and Group “C” posts in different Ministries/ Departments/ Organizations.
Assistant Audit Officer/ Assistant Accounts Officer:
Essential Qualifications:
Date for submission of online applications: 22-10-2019 to 25-11-2019
Last date for receipt of application: 25-11-2019 (17:00)
Last date for making online fee payment: 27-11-2019 (17:00)
Last date for generation of offline Challan: 27-11-2019 (17:00)
Last date for payment through Challan (during working hours of Bank): 29-11-2019
Dates of Tier-I Examination (CBE): 02-03-2020 to 11-03-2020 Dates of Tier-II (CBE) and Tier-III (Des.)
Examinations: 22-06-2020 to 25-06-2020
For Further Information Click here.
The Rajasthan High Court has granted bail to Accused on alleged Input Tax Credit ( ITC ) worth Rs. 7.12 Crore has been wrongly claimed by Padmavati Industries.
The petitioner was the Manager and Authorized signatory of Padmavati Industries.
The petitioner contended that an amount of Rs.3.33 Crore was deposited with the Department, thus bringing the total disputed tax credit amount to below Rs.5 Crore and if the tax credit amount is below five crores the offence is bailable.
While allowing the bail application, Justice Pankaj Bhandari observed that, the total amount which as per Department is wrongly claimed after deposit of Rs.3.33 Crores is less than Rs.5 Crore, Hence the Court allowed the bail application.
The Court also directed that, the accused petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lac Only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lac Only) each to the satisfaction of the learned court below with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Authority of Advance Ruling in West Bengal has ruled that, GST Registration is not needed for Co-Owner in Association of Persons ( AoP ) until the turnover reached the Threshold limit under the GST Act, 2017.
The Applicant is one of the co-owners of immovable property, jointly owned by three individuals. All three co-owners, including the Applicant, hold an equal share in the property. The property is let out to CGST & CX, Chandannagar Division. Total rental received exceeds the threshold provided under section 22(1) of the GST Act, but the share of each of the three co-owners does not cross the said threshold.
The Applicant seeks a ruling on whether he and the other two co-owners are to be treated as an association of persons or a body of individuals and, therefore, a person as defined under section 2(84)(f) of the GST Act, who is required to be registered under section 22(1) of the Act.
The AAR observed that, “the Applicant and the other two co-owners cannot be treated as an association of persons and, therefore, as a person defined under section 2(84X0 of the GST Act, where their income from renting is separately ascertainable and assessed for income tax individually at the hand of each co-owner. Whether the Applicant is required to be registered under section 22(1) of the GST Act will, therefore, depend on his gross turnover, ascertained separately from the other co-owners, exceeding the threshold as provided under the Act”.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs ( CBIC ) has issued a clarification on Restriction in availing of the input tax credit in terms of sub-rule (4) of rule 36 of CGST Rules, 2017.
The said sub-rule provides a restriction in availing of input tax credit (ITC) in respect of invoices or debit notes, the details of which have not been uploaded by the suppliers under sub-section (1) of section 37of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The restriction is not imposed through the common portal and it is the responsibility of the taxpayer that credit is availed in terms of the said rule and therefore, the availment of restricted credit in terms of sub-rule (4) of rule 36 of CGST Rules shall be done on a self-assessment basis by the taxpayers.
The CBIC clarified that, The restriction imposed is not supplier wise. The credit available under sub-rule (4) of rule 36 is linked to total eligible credit from all suppliers against all supplies whose details have been uploaded by the suppliers. Further, the calculation would be based on only those invoices which are otherwise eligible for ITC. Accordingly, those invoices on which ITC is not available under any of the provision (say under sub-section (5) of section 17) would not be considered for calculating 20 per cent. of the eligible credit available.
The CBIC also clarified that, The amount of input tax credit in respect of the invoices/debit notes whose details have not been uploaded by the suppliers shall not exceed 20% of the eligible input tax credit available to the recipient in respect of invoices or debit notes the details of which have been uploaded by the suppliers under subsection (1) of section 37 as on the due date of filing of the returns in FORM GSTR-1 of the suppliers for the said tax period. The taxpayer may have to ascertain the same from his auto-populated FORM GSTR 2A as available on the due date of filing of FORM GSTR-1 under sub-section (1) of section 37.
Regarding the issue How much ITC a registered taxpayer can avail in his Form GSTR-3B in a month in case the details of some of the invoices have not been uploaded by the suppliers under subsection (1) of section 37, the CBIC clarified that, Sub-rule (4) of rule 36 prescribes that the ITC to be availed by a registered person in respect of invoices or debit notes, the details of which have not been uploaded by the suppliers under sub-section (1) of section 37, shall not exceed 20 per cent. of the eligible credit available in respect of invoices or debit notes the details of which have been uploaded by the suppliers under sub-section (1) of section 37.
The balance ITC may be claimed by the taxpayer in any of the succeeding months provided details of requisite invoices are uploaded by the suppliers. He can claim proportionate ITC as and when details of some invoices are uploaded by the suppliers provided that credit on invoices, the details of which are not uploaded (under sub-section (1) of section 37) remains under 20 per cent of the eligible input tax credit, the details of which are uploaded by the suppliers. Full ITC of balance amount may be availed, in present illustration by “R”, in case of total ITC pertaining to invoices the details of which have been uploaded reaches Rs. 8.3 lakhs (Rs 10 lakhs /1.20). In other words, the taxpayer may avail full ITC in respect of a tax period, as and when the invoices are uploaded by the suppliers to the extent Eligible ITC/ 1.2, the CBI also added.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Institute of Chartered Accountants of India ( ICAI ) has postponed CA Examinations Scheduled today for next dates.
In an announcement issued by ICAI has said that, “In view of the reports gathered through electronic media about closure of school and colleges at various parts of the country, ALL EXAMINATIONS of the ICAI namely Foundation Paper 1, Final Paper 5, IRM Paper1, INTT AT and DISA ET Paper scheduled for Saturday, November 9th 2019 on all India basis and abroad stand postponed to a later date which shall be announced separately”.
The Income Tax Department has conducted a search in the case of a businessman in Pune on 04/11/2019 and made a high cash seizure. The search was conducted at the residence of the businessman.
Intelligence information was received on 04/11/2019 that the businessman was in possession of large amount of cash at his residence and that this cash was likely to be moved within short span of time.
In a swift action, some preliminary discreet enquiries were made to ascertain the availability of cash and a single warrant was executed to search the residence of the individual, along with survey u/s 133A at his business premises.
The assessee is in the business of construction subcontracting and real estate activities. During the search, unaccounted cash amounting to Rs. 9.55 crore was found and seized. This is the highest cash seizure in Pune by the Income Tax Department till date. Investigations in the case are still under progress.
In a large scale operation against frauds in banks, the Central Bureau of Investigation ( CBI ) is today conducting searches at around 187 places in different States/UTs including in Andhra Pradesh, Chandigarh, Delhi, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Dadra & Nagar Haveli related to Bank Fraud Cases.
CBI has registered around 42 cases of bank frauds involving Rs. 7200 crore (approx.). The banks involved (including consortium members) are Andhra Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Indian Overseas Bank, SBI, Allahabad Bank, Canara Bank, Dena Bank, Punjab & Sind Bank, Punjab National Bank, Central Bank of India, Union Bank of India, IDBI Bank, Bank of Baroda, Bank of Maharashtra and Bank of India. .
The places being searched are in Delhi, Gurgaon, Chandigarh, Ludhiana, Dehradun, Noida, Baramati, Mumbai, Thane, Silvassa, Kalyan, Amritsar, Faridabad, Bengaluru, Tirupur, Chennai, Madurai, Quilon, Cochin, Bhavnagar, Surat, Ahmedabad, Kanpur, Ghaziabad, Varanasi, Chandauli, Bhatinda, Gurdaspur, Morena, Kolkata, Patna, Krishna, Hyderabad and Bhopal. Out of these 42 cases, there are 4 cases of more than Rs. 1000 crore (approx.) and 11 cases of fraud amount of Rs. 100 crore (approx.) to Rs. 1000 crore (approx.).
The prominent cases registered include:- a case registered against a Malad (East) Mumbai / Bhopal based private company; its 5 Directors/Additional Director/Guarantors and unknown public servants on the allegations that the accused Directors and Guarantors of the said Mumbai / Bhopal based company engaged in bulk trading of agro commodities, in connivance with unknown bank officials & others fraudulently availed credit facilities of Rs. 6000 crore (approx.) from SBI, Bhopal by resorting to falsification of accounts and forgery of documents, such as bill of lading, falsely showing movement of goods etc. The company allegedly siphoned off the funds & defaulted in payment of the dues and caused loss of Rs. 1266.63 crore (approx.) to the bank.
One more case has been registered against two private companies based at Nehru Place, New Delhi; its Chairman; Managing Director; Director and other unknown public servants/private persons. It was alleged that the Directors and Guarantors of the said Delhi based company engaged in engineering procurement and construction, in connivance with unknown bank officials & others fraudulently availed credit facilities of Rs. 1290 crore (approx.) from SBI, New Delhi by resorting to falsification of accounts and forgery of documents. The company allegedly siphoned off the funds & defaulted in payment of the dues and caused loss of Rs. 1100.73 crore (approx.) to the bank.
Another case has been registered against Chennai based private company; its promoter; Managing Director and 7 other office bearers including Chief Accounts officer and unknown public servants/unknown others on the complaint of IDBI Bank Ltd. on behalf of other Consortium member Banks viz. Allahabad Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Syndicate Bank, State Bank of India, Dena Bank (now Bank of Baroda), Bank of Maharashtra, Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, Oriental Bank of Commerce, UCO Bank and Canara Bank for cheating and causing loss of Rs. 1083.14 crore (approx.) to the banks. .
It was alleged that the accused persons have conspired with each other and cheated IDBI Bank & other consortium member banks in the matter of availing and utilisation of the credit facilities sanctioned. In pursuance of the conspiracy, the company has manipulated their books of accounts by making fictitious entries based on false documents and submitted false & manipulated financial statements to the consortium of banks for availing the credit facilities. The sanctioned amounts were utilised / diverted for purposes other than for which the same were released by way of fictitious transactions.
Yet another case has been registered against Chairman and Directors of a Varanasi based private company and unknown public servants on the allegations of submitting wrong stock statement and Balance Sheet to induce Bank of Baroda for fraudulent and dishonest availment/sanction of Bank loan. The company has allegedly defrauded Bank of Baroda to the tune of Rs. 518.44 crore (approx.) as on 31.12.2018. It was further alleged that the said company has also defrauded Punjab National Bank to the tune of Rs. 517.99 crore (approx.) adopting the same modus-operandi.
During searches, incriminating documents have been recovered so far. Searches are still in progress.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs ( CBIC ) has issued Guidelines for candidates appearing for GST Practitioners Exam.
A. Guidelines for filling up application form:
B. Guidelines for appearing in the Examination:
a) Obtaining support for his candidature by any means;
b) Impersonating;
c) Submitting fabricated documents;
d) Resorting to any unfair means or practices in connection with the examination or in connection with the result of the examination;
e) Found in possession of any paper, book, note or any other material, the use of which is not permitted in the examination center;
f) Communicating with others or exchanging calculators, chits, papers etc. (on which something is written);
g) Misbehaving in the examination center in any manner;
h) Tampering with the hardware and/or software deployed; and
i) Attempting to commit or, as the case may be, to abet in the commission of all or any of the acts specified in the foregoing clauses.
Resorting to unfair means or practices shall be considered as a serious offence. If any candidate is or has been found to be indulging use of unfair means or practices, his candidature will be cancelled and he will be disqualified for the examination.
C. Guidelines for post-examination representation and its disposal:
The Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT ) has notified Special Courts for Trial of Offences under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
By the Virtue sub-section (1) of Section 280A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Central Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Gujarat has designated thirty-five Courts in Gujarat State.
The sections dealing with offences and prosecution proceedings are included in Chapter XXII of the Income-tax Act, 1961 i.e. S. 275A to S. 280D of the Act. However, the provisions contained in said Chapter XXII of the Act do not inter se deal with the procedures regulating the prosecution itself, which is governed by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
The provisions of the said Code are to be followed relating to all offences under the Income Tax Act unless the contrary is specially provided for by the Act. An appropriate example would be S. 292A of the Act that prescribes that S. 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition) and the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, would not apply to a person convicted of an offence under the Income Tax Act, unless the accused is under eighteen of age.
The Finance Act, 2012, w.e.f. 1-7-2012 has inserted S. 280A to 280D, wherein the Central Government has been given the power to constitute Special Courts in consultation with the Chief Justices of the respective jurisdictional High Courts. Normally, the Magistrate Court in whose territorial jurisdiction an offence is committed tries the offence.
For direct tax cases, the offence is said to commit at the place where a false return of income is submitted, even though it is completely possible that the return has been prepared elsewhere or that accounts have been fabricated at some other place.
A First Class Magistrate or a Metropolitan Magistrate should try the prosecution case under the direct taxes. If a Special Economic Offences Court with specified jurisdiction is notified, the complaint is to be filed before the respective court.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentThe Punjab Logistics Infrastructure Limited (PLIL) has invited applications from Chartered Accountants and Company Secretaries for the post of Assistant Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Company Secretary respectively.
Punjab Logistics Infrastructure Limited (PLIL), a Joint Venture Company of Container Corporation of India Limited (CONCOR – a Navratna Public Sector Undertaking under Ministry of Railways, Govt. of India) and Punjab State Container and Warehousing Corporation Limited (CONWARE – wholly-owned State Govt. Company) registered under the Companies Act, has set up a Multi-Modal Logistics Park in District Ludhiana (Punjab).
SELECTION PROCESS
Date and Time for registration for interview:- 09:00 AM to 12:00 PM – dated 02/12/19
Date & Time of Walk-in-Interview:- 02/12/19 from 11:00 AM onwards
Venue:- Regenta Central Klassik, Royal Orchid Hotels, Opp. Model Town, Link Road, Ludhiana – 141002,
For Further Information Click here.
The Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT ) has notified Amendments in various Income Tax Forms which provide Aadhaar can be used instead of Permanent Account Number ( PAN ).
The CBDT made changes in forty-eight different places.
Section 139A of the Income Tax Act was amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 to provide for interchangeability of PAN and Aadhaar number.
A person, not having PAN, may furnish his Aadhaar number in lieu of PAN, in all those transaction where furnishing of PAN is mandatory.
The Notification came into force from September 1st, 2019. The CBDT also clarified that, no person is being adversely affected by giving retrospective effect to these amendment rules.
According to Section 40 of the Finance Act, 2019, a person who ) has not been allotted a permanent account number but possesses the Aadhaar number, may furnish or intimate or quote his Aadhaar number in lieu of the permanent account number, and such person shall be allotted a permanent account number in such manner as may be prescribed.
The Section also said that, a person who has been allotted a permanent account number, and who has intimated his Aadhaar number in accordance with provisions of sub-section (2) of section 139AA, may furnish or intimate or quote his Aadhaar number in lieu of the permanent account number.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
The Documentation Identification Number ( DIN ) system of Central Board of Indirect Taxes (CBIC) will come into existence from tomorrow, i.e., on Friday, 8th November 2019. This path-breaking DIN system in indirect tax administration has been created as per the direction of Union Minister for Finance and Corporate Affairs Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman and from now onwards any CBIC communication will have to have a Documentation Identification Number.
The Government has already executed the DIN system in the direct tax administration. This step is to further the Government’s objectives of bringing transparency and accountability in the indirect tax administration also through the widespread use of information technology.
Revenue Secretary Dr Ajay Bhushan Pandey said, “To begin with, in the indirect tax administration, the DIN would be used for search authorisation, summons, arrest memo, inspection notices and letters issued in the course of any enquiry. From now onwards, any communication from GST or Custom or Central Excise department without a computer-generated DIN, would be treated as invalid and shall be non est in law or deemed to be as if it has never been issued.”
“The DIN system would ensure greater accountability and transparency in the indirect tax administration as well. It would also provide the taxpayer with a digital facility to verify any communications. Further, the DIN system would be extended to other communications by the end of next month. No communication would be issued without DIN except only if it is in the specified exceptional circumstances,” said Dr Pandey.
CBIC Chairman Shri Pranab K. Das said, “This measure would create a digital directory for maintaining a proper audit trail of such communications. Now all such specified communications with DIN would be verifiable on the online portal cbicddm.gov.in and any communication which is not in conformity with the prescribed guidelines as per the DIN related Circulars dated 05.11.2019 shall be treated as invalid.”
It would be pertinent to mention here that while specifying such exceptional circumstances the CBIC Circulars related to DIN dated 05.11.2019 say that whenever any such manual communication would be issued, it would be necessarily required to specify reason of issuing such a communication without DIN and written approval of the competent authority shall be obtained within 15 days.
CBIC has specified that any communication issued manually under exceptional circumstances would have to be regularised on the system within 15 working days of its issuance.
The CBIC, in exercise of its power under section 168(1) of the CGST Act, 2017/ Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944/ Section 151A of the Customs Act, 1962, is implementing the system for electronic generation of a Document Identification Number (DIN) for all such communications sent by its offices to taxpayers and other concerned persons.
Generation and quoting of Document Identification Number ( DIN ) on any communication issued by the officers of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to taxpayers and other concerned persons are mandatory.
The CBIC has said that, the DIN would be used for search authorization, summons, arrest memo, inspection notices and letters issued in the course of any enquiry. This measure would create a digital directory for maintaining a proper audit trail of such communication.
The CBIC also directed that, no search authorization, summons, arrest memo, inspection notices and letters issued in the course of any enquiry shall be issued by any officer under the Board to a taxpayer or any other person, on or after the 8th day of November, 2019 without a computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) being duly quoted prominently in the body of such communication.
The Board also directs that any specified communication which does not bear the electronically generated DIN and is not covered by the exceptions shall be treated as invalid and shall be deemed to have never been issued.
The 21st Meeting of the Financial Stability and Development Council (FSDC) was held here today under the Chairmanship of the Union Minister for Finance & Corporate Affairs Nirmala Sitharaman.
The meeting was attended by Shri Shaktikanta Das, Governor, Reserve Bank of India (RBI); Shri Atanu Chakraborty, Secretary, Department of Economic Affairs; Shri Rajiv Kumar, Finance Secretary and Secretary, Department of Financial Services; Shri Injeti Srinivas, Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs; Shri Ajay Bhushan Pandey, Revenue Secretary; Shri Ajay Prakash Sawhney, Secretary, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology; Dr Krishnamurthy V. Subramanian, Chief Economic Adviser, Ministry of Finance; Shri Ajay Tyagi, Chairman, Securities and Exchange Board of India; Shri Subhash Chandra Khuntia, Chairman, Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India; Dr M.S. Sahoo, Chairperson, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India; Shri Ravi Mital, Special Secretary, Department of Financial Services and in charge, Chairperson, Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority; and other senior officers of the Government of India and Financial Sector Regulators.
The Council reviewed the current global and domestic macro-economic situation and financial stability and vulnerabilities issues, including inter-alia, those concerning NBFCs and Credit Rating Agencies.
The Council reviewed the action taken by members on the decision taken by FSDC earlier and held discussions on the proposals submitted for further strengthening of the resolution framework and framework for cyber security of the financial sector.
The Council also took note of the activities undertaken by the FSDC Sub-Committee chaired by the Governor, RBI and the initiatives taken by the various regulators in the financial sector.
