Pr. CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd (Delhi High Court)
S. 143(2)/ 292BB: Failure to issue a s. 143(2) notice renders the reassessment order void. S. 292BB saves a case of "non service" of the notice but not a case of "non issue"
The failure of the AO, in re-assessment proceedings, to issue notice under Section 143(2) of the Act, prior to finalising the re-assessment order, cannot be condoned by referring to Section 292BB of the Act. Section 292BB applies insofar as failure of "service" of notice is concerned and not with regard to failure to "issue" notice. The non-issue of the said notice is fatal to the order of re-assessment
ITO vs. Legal Heir of Shri Durgaprasad Agnihotri (ITAT Mumbai)
Correctness of law laid down by Bombay High Court in Ace Builder 281 ITR 210 that deduction u/s 54EC is available to to short-term capital gains computed u/s 50 doubted by Tribunal
By virtue of the deeming provision of section 50, cost of a long-term capital asset (LTCA), i.e., as per section 2(29A), where depreciable, forming part of a block assets on which depreciation stands claimed, the capital gain on its transfer would have to be computed in terms thereof, i.e. by treating the WDV of the relevant block of assets (or, as the case may be, the relevant asset) as its cost of acquisition. The second deeming per the provision of section 50 is qua the nature of such capital gains, i.e., as capital gains arising from the transfer of a STCA. Section 54EC is available on capital gain arising on the transfer of a LTCA, i.e., which is not a STCA by definition. The same shall, therefore, not apply to capital gains computed u/s.50
DCIT vs. Sunita Khemka (ITAT Kolkata)
The AO cannot treat a transaction as bogus only on the basis of suspicion or surmise. He has to bring material on record to support his finding that there has been collusion/connivance between the broker and the assessee for the introduction of its unaccounted money. A transaction of purchase and sale of shares, supported by Contract Notes and demat statements and Account Payee Cheques cannot be treated as bogus
Where the payments are made by Account Payee Cheques and the existence of the brokers is not disputed the assessee cannot be punished for the default of the brokers and share transactions cannot be held to be bogus. When purchase and sale of shares were supported by proper Contract Notes, deliveries of shares were received through demat accounts maintained with various agencies, the shares were purchased and sold through recognised broker and the sale considerations were received by Account Payee Cheques, the transactions cannot be treated as bogus. Assessment cannot be made on the basis of suspicion or surmise. The AO has not brought any material on record to support his finding that there has been collusion/connivance between the broker and the appellant for the introduction of its unaccounted money
CBDT Irked (Again) At Poor Show By Dept Before AAR & Issues Guidelines For Strict Compliance
On an earlier occasion, the CBDT had issued Instruction in F. No. 500/98/2015-FT&TR-V dated 14th August, 2015 in which it had lamented the fact of poor representation on behalf of the department in the cases before the Authority of Advance Rulings. It had issued instructions that only senior officials who are well prepared on facts and law should be deputed so as to effectively represent the Departmental view on complex issues. The CBDT has now issued another Instruction F.No.225/261/2015/ITA.II dated 28.10.2015 in which it has taken exception to the fact that:
(i) Departmental Representatives are seeking adjournment on unjustified grounds;
(ii) Departmental Representatives not committing to a particular position on the ground of seeking further instructions from the field authorities;
(iii) All the questions raised in an application not properly responded to, while furnishing the report.
In order to deal with the malaise, the CBDT has issued clear-cut directions and warned that the said directions should be followed strictly.
CBDT Directs That Taxpayers' Grievances Sent By Email Should Be Quickly Resolved
Aayakar Sampark Kendra (ASK) is one of the initiatives of the Income Tax Department to provide Taxpayer Information and Services to the taxpayers across the country. At present five call centers of Aayakar Sampark Kendra (One NCC at Gurgaon and four RCCs at Jammu, Jangipur, Kochi and Shillong) are functioning to answer queries related to the status of PAN & TAN applications, procedure of filing of Income tax & Wealth tax returns, downloading of calls and other general queries. Taxpayers have also been provided a facility to register grievances through email through the call centers of ASK
Regards,
Editor,
---------------------
Latest:CIT vs. AMCO Power Systems Ltd (Karnataka High Court)
S. 79: As the purpose of the provision is to prevent misuse of losses by transferring ownership, it should be restricted to cases of transfer of 'beneficial shareholding'. A transfer of shares of the loss-making company by the shareholder-company to its subsidiary is not hit by s. 79
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment