TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court confirms NSE not liable for alleged STT short deduction. Revenue appeal dismissed.</h1> <h3>Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 Versus National Stock Exchange</h3> Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 Versus National Stock Exchange - [2020] 425 ITR 588 (Bom) Issues Involved:1. Liability of National Stock Exchange (NSE) for alleged short deduction of Security Transaction Tax (STT).2. Fault in collection of correct STT by NSE.3. Responsibility of member brokers in collecting correct STT.4. Deletion of penalty for failure to collect the said STT.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Liability of National Stock Exchange (NSE) for alleged short deduction of Security Transaction Tax (STT):The Revenue appealed against the Tribunal's decision that NSE was not liable for any alleged short deduction of STT. The Tribunal held that the duty of NSE was to collect STT at the correct rate for transactions executed through a particular client code. If there was a default by a member broker in collecting STT correctly, NSE could not be held responsible. The Tribunal emphasized that NSE's responsibility was to ensure the determination of the value of taxable securities transactions purchased and sold through a client code and collect STT accordingly, beyond which there was no mechanism provided for NSE to mandatorily collect STT.2. Fault in collection of correct STT by NSE:The Tribunal found that NSE had collected STT in accordance with the provisions specified in Section 98 of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004, and had determined the STT as per the mechanism laid down in Section 99(c) read with Rule 3 and its Explanation. The Tribunal concluded that NSE had complied with its statutory requirement to collect STT through client codes provided by member brokers and had credited the collected STT to the Central Government. Therefore, no fault could be ascribed to NSE for any alleged short deduction of STT.3. Responsibility of member brokers in collecting correct STT:The Tribunal noted that the client codes are provided by the member brokers and not by NSE. It was observed that if member brokers did not take separate client codes for FIIs, resulting in a lower STT being levied, NSE could not be held responsible. The Tribunal highlighted that NSE had issued a circular to its member brokers to use two client codes for investors whose transactions are to be settled through delivery mode only. Any failure by the brokers to comply with this could not be attributed to NSE.4. Deletion of penalty for failure to collect the said STT:The Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed on NSE, holding that since there was no shortfall of STT and NSE had not committed any default under the law, the penalty was unwarranted. The Tribunal's decision was based on the finding that NSE had collected and credited the STT as per the statutory requirements and any default in collecting correct STT was on the part of the member brokers.Conclusion:The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that NSE was not liable for any alleged short deduction of STT and no fault could be ascribed to NSE for any short collection of STT. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and it was concluded that no substantial question of law arose from the Tribunal's order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
