Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback✕

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
Make Most of Text Search ✕
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
╳
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
✕
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
❮ Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Filters / Advanced Search ❯
TEXT

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In
Main Text + AI Text ❯
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws---- ❯
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ---- ❯
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
Relevance Default Date
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Distinction Between Business Income and Deemed Income in Income Tax Assessments: Higher rate of tax ...
    Case Laws Customs
    From Valuation to Penalty and redemption fine: Legal Implications of Importing Restricted Goods in C...
    Case Laws Service Tax
    Analyzing the Implications of Delay in Tax Adjudication: A Case Study
    Case Laws Corporate Laws
    Secured Creditors and Asset Disposal in Liquidation: High Court's Balancing Act
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analysis of ITAT's Decision on Surplus Stock Taxation
    Contractual Compliance and GST Reimbursement: Unpacking a Landmark Judgment"
    The Legal Contours of Input Tax Credit Eligibility: Procedural Aspects of GST and ITC
    Case Laws Service Tax
    Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM): Service Tax Implications for Exporters: A Legal Perspective on Forei...
    Case Laws Indian Laws
    Cheque Dishonour and Corporate Responsibility: Analyzing the Supreme Court's Latest Judgment
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Validity of Notices / orders without DIN. The Critical Role of Procedural Compliance in Tax Administ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Tax Exemptions: Capitation Fees in Educational Institutions: A Legal Quagmire
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Procedural Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice in Tax Administration: A High Court Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Revision u/s 263 and denial of deduction u/s 80IA: A Critical Analysis of the Delhi High Court's Jud...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Condonation of Delay and Jurisdictional Challenges: A Case Analysis of ITAT Kolkata's Decision
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Legal Analysis: Scrutiny of Share Capital and Premium Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Retrospective Cancellation of Charitable Trust Registration: A Case Analysis of...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Office and Prosecution under Income Tax Act: Jurisdiction of Trial Court - Decision in a High Profil...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Taxation of Unexplained Income at Higher Rate of tax u/s 115BBE : A Comprehensive Analysis of the IT...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analysis of ITAT Mumbai Judgment - Transfer Pricing Adjustment Dispute: Period of limitation u/s 144...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    In-Depth Analysis of Key Issues in the ITAT Chennai Judgement
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

+

Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

NOTE:

Notes
Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
Results Found:
Show All Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Deemed income classification denied where surrendered receipts are linked to business activities, avoiding higher tax rate.
Where surrendered cash, advances and stock discrepancies identified in a survey are linked to ordinary business activities and the assessee supplies specific explanations of source and nexus, the deeming provisions for unexplained investments and unrecorded ownership do not automatically apply; accordingly the higher-rate taxation applicable to incomes classified as deemed income is inapplicable and the amounts are treated as business income for tax purposes.
Case Laws Customs
Show AI Summary
Redemption fine reduction for restricted imports emphasises proportionality in customs penalty and valuation disputes practice.
Valuation of imported used multifunction machines was reassessed by a Chartered Engineer, supporting an enhanced customs value while prompting scrutiny of their classification as restricted and the legal basis for detention. The Tribunal evaluated confiscation limits and applied proportionality in monetary sanctions, reducing the imposed penalty and redemption fine to specified proportions of the enhanced value, thereby illustrating judicial discretion in balancing enforcement with fairness in customs adjudication.
Case Laws Service Tax
Show AI Summary
Delay in tax adjudication undermines statutory timeframe and can violate principles of natural justice, affecting taxpayers' rights.
Inordinate delay in adjudicating a service tax show cause notice raised whether such delay contravened the statutory timeframe under Section 73 and violated principles of natural justice; the delay of about a decade, despite an early response by the taxpayer, was characterised as inordinate and prejudicial, inconsistent with the statutory aim of prompt determination and established precedents requiring proceedings to conclude within a reasonable period.
Case Laws Corporate Laws
Show AI Summary
Secured creditor priority upheld; asset protection costs initially borne by creditors and rival claims sent to the specialized tribunal for adjudication.
The court transferred disputes over assets of a company in liquidation to the specialized insolvency tribunal for expedited adjudication, affirmed the priority of secured creditors while permitting other claimants to present possessory or contractual claims before the tribunal, and ordered that interim asset protection expenses be initially borne by secured creditors but remain recoverable as part of their claims.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Surplus stock classification: accounting linkage to business determines treatment as business income over unexplained investment.
Classification of surplus stock found during a section 133A survey depends on its nexus with ordinary trading and documentary accounting. Where excess inventory is recorded in the stock register and credited to partners' capital account, these accounting entries indicate it forms part of regular business stock and support treatment as business income rather than unexplained investment under section 69B, affecting applicability of special tax treatment under section 115BBE.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
GST reimbursement entitlement affirmed for contract wide transactions, requiring payment with statutory interest and retrospective calculation.
The court construed amended contract clauses to cover GST impact on both direct and indirect transactions, concluding that the implementing agency's cessation of reimbursements and retrospective recoveries breached contractual promises and principles of promissory estoppel and Article 14, giving rise to an entitlement to reimbursement of withheld GST sums with statutory interest and a court directed timeline for calculation and payment.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Input Tax Credit eligibility: procedural limits on reversing claims without supplier inquiry and GSTR-2A non-reflection not dispositive.
Section 16(2) sets the statutory conditions for Input Tax Credit-tax invoice, receipt, tax payment, and return filing-and GSTR-2A serves only as a facilitator; non-reflection there does not automatically negate eligibility. Tax authorities must inquire into supplier conduct and observe procedural safeguards before reversing ITC or recovering tax from the recipient, with judicial precedents and CBIC clarifications shaping when exceptions may apply.
Case Laws Service Tax
Show AI Summary
Reverse charge mechanism: exporter not liable for foreign bank charges when Indian bank is the direct service recipient.
The core issue is whether an exporter is liable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for foreign bank charges deducted from export proceeds when those charges are imposed on and paid by an Indian intermediary bank. The Tribunal's analysis focuses on the definition of service recipient and territorial scope, concluding that the direct recipient-the Indian bank-is the party liable to discharge service tax while the exporter, as an indirect beneficiary without direct dealings with the foreign bank, is not subject to reverse charge.
Case Laws Indian Laws
Show AI Summary
Directorial liability: strict averment requirement prevents presuming directors' responsibility without specific allegation, leading to quashing.
The Court held that directorial liability requires specific averment that the director was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business at the time of the offence; mere titular position or awareness of cheque issuance is insufficient. It emphasized the necessity of serving the statutory notice prerequisite and rejected liberal construction to cure absent statutory averments, quashing proceedings against directors for non-compliance.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
DIN requirement in tax administration: absence of mandatory DIN can invalidate assessment orders unless exceptional circumstances apply.
Failure to quote the mandatory computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) in assessment orders, as required by the CBDT Circular from 1 October 2019, constitutes a procedural defect that can render the order invalid unless the revenue demonstrates that the issuance fell within the Circular's narrowly drawn exceptional circumstances; the Tribunal found such non-compliance in the order dated 15 October 2019 and the High Court affirmed, while the Supreme Court granted interim stay for further consideration.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Capitation fee allegations challenge admissibility and attribution of seized evidence in charitable trust tax exemption inquiries.
Alleged collection of capitation fees by a registered charitable trust threatens its exemption under Section 11; most evidence was seized from employees' residences, invoking the presumption under Section 132(4A) and raising attribution issues. Employee admissions later retracted, similar statement drafting, declarations under the Income Declaration Scheme 2016, and trustees' acknowledgments create contradictory evidentiary threads that complicate admissibility, credibility, and whether the seized funds can be treated as trust income.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Condonation of delay in tax compliance: liberal interpretation protects bona fide taxpayers from technical disqualification.
The court analysed whether delay in filing Form 10 could be condoned, considering the petitioner's unawareness of post 2016 amendments, CBDT circulars and precedent, and applying principles that each case be judged on its facts; it stressed that failure to claim accumulation does not by itself show absence of intent to comply and urged a liberal approach to mitigate genuine hardship and prevent procedural technicalities from defeating substantive justice.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Section 263 limited to substantial legal errors; mere differences of opinion don't justify revisional tax action.
Scope of Section 263 is confined to instances where an assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue in a substantial way, not mere differences of opinion. Migration of licences from IP VPN to NLD ILD does not, by itself, create a new undertaking defeating entitlement to deduction under Section 80IA(4)(ii), particularly where identical deductions were previously allowed; administrative migration requires clear proof of substantive change before re characterising eligibility.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Delay condonation based on sufficient cause upheld where illness, relocation and pandemic disruption justified late filing and jurisdictional challenge.
The tribunal applied a purposive construction of sufficient cause to condone substantial delay where cumulative factors-serious illness, change of residence and pandemic disruption-made filing untimely. It also found the assessment infirm for want of territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction because the taxpayer had established residence and filing history in a different territorial unit and administrative guidance allocated jurisdiction accordingly, underscoring that proper vesting of authority is a condition precedent to valid assessment.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Unexplained cash credits under Section 68 require taxpayers to prove investor identity and genuineness; authorities must rebut with evidence.
Applicability of Section 68 requires the assessee to establish investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness-via PAN, tax returns, audited accounts and bank statements-and once this initial burden is satisfied, the burden shifts to the revenue to rebut with concrete evidence; mere suspicion or inability to trace an ultimate source does not alone justify additions if investments are reasonable relative to investors' net worth and effected through banking channels.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Retrospective cancellation of charitable trust registration invalidated due to lack of competent jurisdiction and procedural non compliance.
The Tribunal invalidated the cancellation of a charitable trust's registration because the regional authority lacked competence to cancel under the statutory scheme and the transfer used to reassign the matter was improper; it further held that applying the newer cancellation provision retrospectively to deprive the trust of its recognized status was not legally tenable, emphasizing required notice, hearing and adherence to principled statutory interpretation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Jurisdiction in multi locational offences governs venue determination; magistrate discretion and supervisory thresholds shape tax prosecution forums under criminal procedure.
The judgment analyses Cr.P.C. place of offence principles in multi locational tax prosecutions, assessing whether procedural acts like recording statements under the Income Tax Act determine venue. It evaluates the magistrate's discretion in taking cognizance where alleged offences span jurisdictions and outlines the threshold for superior court supervisory intervention, emphasising that extraordinary petitions require demonstration of abuse of process or exceptional circumstances before altering magistrate venue determinations.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Taxation of unexplained income: higher-rate treatment applies, and deductions including partner salary are disallowed.
The tribunal held that excess unrecorded stock and cash found on survey were assessable as unexplained investment and unexplained money, and that the special higher-rate taxation provision applies to such income, taxing it at a higher fixed rate and disallowing any deduction; consequently the claimed partner's salary relating to the unexplained investment was disallowed.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Limitation under section 144C: assessment issued beyond statutory period, leaving transfer pricing adjustment unresolved on procedural grounds.
The tribunal focused on the statutory time limit under Section 144C(13) for passing assessment orders after DRP directions, treated the order as barred by limitation and therefore did not adjudicate substantive transfer pricing challenges raised under Section 92CA. Consequently, technical disputes over comparability, exclusion/inclusion of comparables, and the profit level indicator computation were left unexamined.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Capitalization of interest: tribunal scrutinised whether interest and forex on capital projects form capital cost or permit revenue deduction.
The tribunal analyzed four core taxation questions: whether interest and foreign exchange fluctuations written off from Capital Work in Progress are capital or revenue in nature and their nexus to business operations; whether write off of a DG set component should be treated within the block of assets for depreciation or as a revenue repair; the applicability of Section 36(1)(iii) to proportionate interest on interest free advances to related concerns and the presumption from mixed funds; and the evidentiary requirements to establish that inter corporate deposits were funded from own funds rather than borrowed monies for interest deduction purposes.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Amendment of Section 55 of the Act (WIDENING AND DEEPENING OF TAX BASE AND ANTI-AVOIDANCE)

24 July, 2024

Contents
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Plus +
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Union Budget 2024-25 (Full) + FINANCE (No.2) Bill, 2024

Prior to Finance Act, 2018, section 10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) provided for exemption in respect of gains arising from the transfer of a long-term capital asset, being an equity share in a company or a unit of an equity oriented fund or a unit of a business trust where the transaction is subject to Securities Transaction Tax (STT). Finance Act, 2018 withdrew the exemption on long-term capital gains from the transfer of equity shares if STT is paid on both acquisition and transfer.

2. With the withdrawal of the exemption, a specific provision in the form of section 112A of the Act was inserted to tax long-term capital gains on transfer of equity shares on which STT is paid at the time of acquisition and transfer. Simultaneously, clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of the Act was inserted to provide a special mechanism for computation of cost of acquisition in respect of assets covered under section 112A of the Act and acquired prior to 01 February 2018.

3. The cost of acquisition under clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of the Act, for an asset referred to in section 112A is to be determined as per the following formula:

Higher of (a) and ( b), where:

(a) Actual cost of acquisition

(b) lower of:

(i) Fair Market Value (FMV) of shares as of 31st January 2018; and

(ii) Full value of Consideration received upon sale.

4. Further, sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of the Explanation to clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of the Act provides for the ‘fair market value’ where the capital asset is an equity share in a company which is not listed on a recognised stock exchange as on the 31st day of January, 2018 but listed on such exchange on the date of transfer, or listed on a recognised stock exchange on the date of transfer and which became the property of the assessee in consideration of share which is not listed on such exchange as on the 31st day of January, 2018 by way of transaction not regarded as transfer under section 47. In such cases, “fair market value” means an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the financial year 2017-18 bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the asset was held by the assessee or for the year beginning on the first day of April, 2001, whichever is later. The Explanation thus envisages defining the Fair Market Value of shares which are listed at the time of transfer.

5. Thereafter, as provided by sub-section (4) of Section 112A of the Act, the Central Government notified some cases of acquisitions to be given the benefits of section 112A where STT could not have been paid at the time of acquisition. Due to the notification, the condition of payment of STT was relaxed for transactions of acquisition which are not chargeable to STT other than some exceptional situations defined. As a consequence, the payment of STT at the acquisition is not required for unlisted equity shares.

6. Due to this relaxation, a lacuna has arisen in computation of cost of acquisition under clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of the Act in the case of equity shares transferred under Offer-For-Sale (OFS) as part of Initial Public Offering (IPO) process where STT is paid at the time of transfer. Since the condition of STT payment at the time of acquisition is relaxed through the aforementioned Notification, it becomes an asset referred to under section 112A. Hence, for determination of cost of acquisition under clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of the Act, the computation of FMV as on 31 January 2018 as per the Explanation is required. However, the equity shares at the time of OFS are unlisted on the date of transfer, since the listing happens a few days after the transfer, and therefore some taxpayers are taking the plea that the computation of FMV is not covered on a literal reading of the Explanation to clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55.

7. It has come to light in survey operations that, taxpayers in some cases are not paying capital gains tax on transfer of shares acquired through Offer for Sale (OFS) route citing the absence of an express provision for determination of the FMV of such equity shares since they were still unlisted on the date of transfer even though STT has been paid on transfer and thus, Cost of Acquisition is indeterminable, and Capital Gains is not chargeable.

8. It is therefore proposed to amend sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of the Explanation to clause (ac) of sub-section (2) of section 55 of the Act, to specifically provide that in a case where the capital asset is an equity share in a company which is not listed on a recognised stock exchange as on the 31st day of January, 2018, or which became the property of the assessee in consideration of share which is not listed on such exchange as on the 31st day of January, 2018 by way of transaction not regarded as transfer under section 47, but listed on such exchange subsequent to the date of transfer, where such transfer is in respect of sale of unlisted equity shares under an offer for sale to the public included in an initial public offer, “fair market value” would mean an amount which bears to the cost of acquisition the same proportion as Cost Inflation Index for the financial year 2017-18 bears to the Cost Inflation Index for the first year in which the asset was held by the assessee or for the year beginning on the first day of April, 2001, whichever is later.

9. This amendment is proposed to be deemed to have been inserted with effect from the 1st day of April, 2018 and shall accordingly apply retrospectively from assessment year 2018-19 onwards.

[Clause 22]


Full Text:

Union Budget 2024-25 (Full) + FINANCE (No.2) Bill, 2024

Topics

Acts Income Tax