GOODS AND SERVICE TAX REPORTS (GSTR) HIGHLIGHTS
F To avail of benefit under rule 3 of 2007 Rules the assessee must opt to pay service tax in respect of works contract before payment of service tax in respect of works contract and is not permitted to change option till the works contract is completed : Nagarjuna Construction Company Ltd. v. Government of India . . . 211
F Component parts of television receivers manufactured, matched and numbered and assembled into finished goods for testing in factory itself before sending in disassembled state to satellite units for re-assembling which possess essential character of finished television receivers not to be taxed as parts of television receivers : Salora International Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . 221
F Interpretation of taxing statutes : Recourse to rules only after considering particular tariff entry along with relevant section and Chapter Notes : Salora International Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . . 221
F Extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in the absence of wilful suppression or misstatement of facts : Uniworth Textiles Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . 246
F Cardinal postulate of law : Burden of proving mala fide lies on the person alleging it : Uniworth Textiles Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . . 246
F Specific averments of allegation in show-cause notice mandatory for commencement of action : Uniworth Textiles Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . . 246
F Circulars cannot impose liability for first time without any enabling provision in statute : All Kerala Association of Chit Funds v. Union of India . . . 180
F Amendment of a statute can be either by incorporation or by deletion : All Kerala Association of Chit Funds v. Union of India . . . 180
F Job worker doing bleaching and dyeing of textiles made by power looms exempted from paying textile cess under section 5A of Textiles Committee Act, 1963 : Pawan Exports P. Ltd. v. Union of India . . 232
F Job workers doing bleaching, dyeing, etc., on textile supplied by textile manufacturers to be treated as extended hand of handloom and power loom of textile manufacturers and not liable to pay impost of cess : Premium Suiting P. Ltd. v. Union of India . . . 235
F Date of endorsement in bills of entry is date of issuance of document as contemplated under section 57G(5) for availing of Modvat credit on duty-paid inputs : Commissioner of Central Excise v. S. R. F. Ltd. . . . 263
F Plastic crates eligible for Cenvat credit as capital goods : P. K. P. N. Shipping Mills P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . . 270
F Service having nexus to business to be treated as input service : BCH Electric Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . . 206
F Where assessee regularly submitting ER-1 returns, only normal limitation period available to Department for recovery of ineligible Cenvat credit : BCH Electric Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise . . . 206
F Notifications :
F Customs Tariff Act, 1975 :
Notification under section 9A(1) and (5) :
Anti-dumping duty on import of cable ties from People's Republic of China and Taiwan . . . 56
Anti-dumping duty on import of choline chloride from People's Republic of China . . . 59
Anti-dumping duty on import of flexible stabstock polyol from United States of America and Japan . . . 64
Anti-dumping duty on import of phthalic anhydride from Korea RP, Taiwan and Israel . . . 61
Anti-dumping duty on import of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) suspension grade from Taiwan, People's Republic of China, Indonesia, Japan, Korea RP, Malaysia, Thailand and USA . . . 49
Anti-dumping duty on import of sodium hydrosulphite from People's Republic of China . . . 54
Anti-dumping duty on import of vitrified porcelain tiles from People's Republic of China : Rescinded . . . 53
Anti-dumping duty on import of vitrified porcelain tiles from People's Republic of China and United Arab Emirates . . . 50
| COMPANY LAW INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT. LTD. No. 2, Vaithyaram Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017. Phone: (044) 24350752 - 55 Fax: (044) 24322015 info@cliofindia.com |
ITR'S TRIBUNAL TAX REPORTS (ITR (Trib)) HIGHLIGHTS
F Refund of excise duty is capital receipt : Vinod Kumar Jain v. ITO (Mumbai) [SB] 567
F Uniform and washing allowance provided to employees not taxable as perquisite in employees's hands and no tax deductible at source : Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (A hd) p. 587
F Payments to employees under holiday home scheme not taxable as perquisite for TDS during operation of FBT scheme not specified as fringe benefit : Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Asst. CIT (A hd) p. 587
F Liquidated damages paid for delay in delivery of goods supplied under contract, revenue expenditure : Huber+Suhner Electronics P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (Delhi) p. 596
F Where original assessments completed and no proceedings pending when search action taken, notice of reassessment for years falling within six year period not permissible : State Bank of India v. Dy. CIT (Mumbai) 609
F Charitable purpose : Cancellation of registration for failure to implement Government policy not sustainable, registration restored : The Civil Services Society v. DIT (Exemption) (Delhi) p. 627
F Income realised from parking rent and licence fee to be assessed as "income from other sources" : JMD Realtors P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (Delhi) p. 654
F Circular clarifying that existing approvals of charitable institutions deemed to have been extended in perpetuity unless specifically withdrawn, approval to continue : Bhole Bhandari Chritable Trust v. CIT (Chandigarh) p. 661
F Where land shown in revenue records as agricultural, no incriminating material found that land is capital asset, no interference : ITO v. Amrutilal B. Shah (Mumbai) p. 668
F Charitable purpose : When assessee carrying on activities of commercial nature and generating huge revenues, cancellation justified u/s. 12AA : Tamil Nadu Cricket Association v. DIT (Exemptions) p. 673
| COMPANY LAW INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT. LTD. No. 2, Vaithyaram Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017. Phone: (044) 24350752 - 55 Fax: (044) 24322015 info@cliofindia.com |
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: CA. V.M.V.SUBBA RAO <vmvsrao@gmail.com>
To: Kanigalla <kanigalla@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 23 March 2013 6:13 AM
Subject: Case Law on Sec 40(a)(ia)
From: CA. V.M.V.SUBBA RAO <vmvsrao@gmail.com>
To: Kanigalla <kanigalla@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 23 March 2013 6:13 AM
Subject: Case Law on Sec 40(a)(ia)
ITO vs. M/s MGB Transport (ITAT Kolkata)
|
S. 40(a)(ia) TDS: Special Bench verdict binding despite suspension by High Court
The assessee paid dumper hire charges of Rs. 36.37 lakhs and claimed it as a deduction. The AO disallowed the claim u/s 40(a)(ia) on the ground that the assessee had not deducted TDS thereon u/s 194C. Before the Tribunal, the assessee argued that it was not liable to deduct TDS u/s 194C as there was only no "contractual agreement". In the alternative, it was argued that in accordance with the Special Bench judgement in Merilyn Shipping 136 ITD 23 (SB), the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) had to be confined to the amounts "payable" as at the end of the year and it did not apply to the amounts already paid during the year. The assessee also argued that though the Andhra Pradesh High Court had granted an "interim suspension" against the said judgement of the Special Bench, it was still binding. HELD by the Tribunal:
The argument that s. 194C does not apply in the absence of a written contractual agreement is not acceptable. Even a verbal contract is sufficient. As regards the judgement of the Special Bench in Merilyn Shipping 136 ITD 23 (SB) where the view was taken that s. 40(a)(ia) can apply only to the amounts remaining payable as at the end of the year and not to the amounts paid during the year, though the Andhra Pradesh High Court has granted "interim suspension" of the said judgement, the said stay/ suspension applies only to the parties to that proceeding and does not destroy the binding effect of the judgement of the Special Bench. There is a difference between "stay of operation" of an order and "quashing of an order". While, in the case of a "quashing", the order of the lower court ceases to exist, in the case of a "stay", the order of the lower court continues to operate and have binding effect. Accordingly, the judgement of the Special Bench in Merilyn Shipping still holds ground and the TDS provisions will apply, for purposes of invocation of s. 40(a)(ia), only on the amounts remaining payable at the end of the year and not on the amounts paid (Shree Chamund Mopeds Ltd. vs. Church of South India Trust Association AIR 1992 SC 1439, 1444 & Pijush Kanti Chowdhury vs. State of West Bengal 2007 (3) CHN 178 followed).
Best Wishes
CA. V.M.V.SUBBA RAO
Chartered Accountant
Door No.24-2-1885,
I Floor, Flat No.5,
Siddivinayaka Residency, I Cross,
Central Avenue, MSR Nagar,
Magunta Layout,
Nellore-524 003
Andhra Pradesh
India
Mobile:+91 - 0 9390221100
+91 - 0 9440278412
e-Mail: vmvsr@rediffmail.com
vmvsr@yahoo.co.uk
http://pdicai.org/MyPage/203038.aspx
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment