Daily Tax & Corporate Law Digest
Dear Reader,
Today’s newsletter analytically summarizes today’s top Tax & Corporate Law stories reported at?taxmann.com , in a unique section-wise format.
INCOME TAX
SECTION 32 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - DEPRECIATION - ALLOWANCE/RATE OF
Illustration: Where Commissioner invoked his revisionary power under section 263 on observing that the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order had adopted profit as per profit and loss account without excluding depreciation already debited in the P&L account under provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, which resulted in double allowance of depreciation under section 32, such revisionary order of Commissioner was proper and within his permissible limits of the law - Penta Media Graphics Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - [2022] 144 taxmann.com 197 (Chennai - Trib.)
SECTION 37(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - BUSINESS EXPENDITURE - ALLOWABILITY OF
Interest on borrowed amount: Where Employees' Foundation, created by assessee-company for purpose of allotment of shares to its employees, had taken a certain amount of loan from a bank and deposited same with assessee as share application and the assessee paid a certain amount of interest on the loan and claimed same as business expenses since Commissioner (Appeals) and Assessing Officer had failed to examine whether the amount, so borrowed, had been used for purpose of the business of assessee or not, the matter was to be remanded back to AO to decided same afresh - Penta Media Graphics Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - [2022] 144 taxmann.com 197 (Chennai - Trib.)
SECTION 40(a)(iib) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - BUSINESS DISALLOWANCE - ROYALTY, LICENCE FEE, ETC.
Where the assessee, a state-owned undertaking, was engaged in retail vending of liquor and collected the sale price of liquor bottles along with VAT, the assessee remitted VAT to the State government and the same was claimed as expenditure under section 37, since VAT was not exclusively levied on assessee but was only indirect tax collected from customers and remitted to Government, furthermore, the assessee could not collect same at a rate higher than specified in Tamilnadu VAT Act, 2006 and thus, could not be considered as the surplus appropriation to State, VAT payable by the assessee would not attract provisions of section 40(a)(iib) and was to be allowed as expenditure - Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle 3(1) - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 55 (Chennai - Trib.)
SECTION 54F OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CAPITAL GAINS - EXEMPTION OF, IN CASE OF INVESTMENT IN RESIDENTIAL HOUSE
Where the Assessing Officer denied the exemption claimed by the assessee under section 54F towards the construction of a residential house on the ground that payment for purchase and construction of the said residential house was made 6 years before the sale of the original asset and thus was not allowable under section 54F, since spending for construction need not be from very sale consideration received from the sale of original asset and test ought to be when construction of the residential house was completed and not when payment was made, there was a serious flaw in application and appreciation of section 54F by lower authorities and, thus, the matter was to be remanded back for a fresh decision - Bindu Premanandh v. Commissioner of Income-tax - [2022] 144 taxmann.com 194 (Kerala)
SECTION 148A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT - CONDUCTING INQUIRY, PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY BEFORE ISSUE OF NOTICE
General: Where the assessee challenged the order passed under section 148A(d) and notice issued under section 148 on the ground that the monetary requirement for reopening assessment was Rs. 50 lakhs which was not fulfilled, since the original section 148 notice was issued within the prescribed time of three years and after remand, impugned section 148 notice had been issued within the time granted by the Court, condition precedent of an asset in the form of Rs. 50 lakhs was not attracted and therefore, said notice could not be said to be invalid - Ester Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax - [2022] 144 taxmann.com 196 (Delhi)
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX LAWS
Notification No. 58/2022-Customs, Dated 18-11-2022
No Export Duty on the export of various items of stainless steel
Editorial Note: The CBIC has issued the notification to amend the levy of export duty on several items. The Nil rate of duty is prescribed on the export of several stainless steel items such as Flat-rolled products of stainless steel; other bars and rods of stainless steel; angles, shapes and sections of stainless steel; Bars and rods, hot-rolled, in irregularly wound coils, of other alloy steel etc.
Notification No. 59/2022-Customs & Notification No. 60/2022-Customs, Dated 18-11-2022
Govt. removes exemption on levy of Customs Duty & AIDC from Coking coal
Editorial Note: The Government has earlier granted exemption from the levy of Customs Duty & AIDC on the import of Coking coal and Anthracite/Pulverized Coal Injection (PCI) coal. Now, the exemption has been withdrawn with effect from November 19th, 2022.
SECTION 132 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 - OFFENCES - PUNISHMENTS FOR CERTAIN OFFENCES
The anticipatory bail application was granted as the applicant was not directly involved in tax evasion and no prima facie case was made out against him - Ritik Arora v. Union of India - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 59 (Rajasthan)
SECTION 171 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 - ANTI - PROFITEERING MEASURE
Where it appeared that amount of profiteering calculated by DGAP in respect of a particular product had already been calculated and confirmed against the manufacturer for the overlapping period, DGAP should re-investigate the matter about the distributor's liability - Director General of Anti-Profiteering v. J.P. & Sons - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 60 (NAA)
COMPANY AND SEBI LAWS
SECTION 92 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 - ANNUAL RETURN
Where in the year 2011, the complaint was filed by the Registrar of Companies with allegations that the Company and its Directors including the petitioner were guilty of the offence as contained in section 162 of the Companies Act, 1956 because of non-compliance with section 220 of the Act, 1956 for not having submitted balance sheet and profit and loss account for period 2008-09 and 2009-10, however, the fact that petitioner had resigned as Director from the company in the year 1995 and S.E.B.I. had already considered this aspect twice and exonerated petitioner from teeth of section 162 and other related provisions, petitioner could not have been fastened with any liability for the period of 2008-09 and 2009-10 - Sachidanand Chitala v. Registrar of Companies - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 58 (Madhya Pradesh)
FEMA BANKING AND INSURANCE LAWS
SECTION 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881 - DISHONOUR OF CHEQUE FOR INSUFFICIENCY, ETC., OF FUNDS IN ACCOUNT
Prosecution against the director for cheque bounce of the company is to be quashed if the company is not arraigned as accused & Director of the company cannot be prosecuted vicariously for cheque bounce by the company if the company is not arraigned as accused and where the allegations in the complaint did not in express words or with reference to the allegations contained therein make out a case that at the time of the commission of the offence, the director named in the complaint as accused was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of its business - Pawan Kumar Goel v. State of U.P. - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 57 (SC)
INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE
SECTION 27 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016 - CORPORATE INSOLVENCY RESOLUTION PROCESS - RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL - REPLACEMENT BY COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS
In terms of section 27, CoC is empowered to change RP with a majority of 66 per cent votes and no opportunity for a hearing is required to be given to RP by NCLT before approving the resolution of CoC for replacement of RP, appeal filed by RP on the ground that NCLT passed impugned order of approving resolution passed by CoC with 100 per cent voting share for replacement of RP without giving any opportunity of being heard was in violation of principles of natural justice was to be dismissed - Sumat Kumar Gupta v. Committee of Creditors of Vallabh Textiles Company Ltd. - [2022] 144 taxmann.com 198 (NCLAT- New Delhi)
SECTION 62 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016 - CORPORATE PERSON’S ADJUDICATING AUTHORITIES - SUPREME COURT, APPEAL TO
SC declines to allow power buyer to terminate PPA with CD in liquidation as CD has not suspended power supply & is willing and able to supply power - Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. v. Yes Bank Ltd. - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 56 (SC)
领英推荐
OPINIONS
Corporate trainer’s/management consultants may avail 44AD lower tax presumptive scheme - Gopal Nathani, CA - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 63 (Article)
Love for ongoing legacy practices in Appeals - Shweta Jain Gupta, Partner, RSA Legal Solutions - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 67 (Article)
Consequences of non-constitution of Audit Committee under the Companies Act 2013 – a case study - Prof R Balakrishnan, FCS - FCWA - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 65 (Article)
After the Emergency in 1976, Foreign Philanthropic Payments again under Regulator’ lens - CA Mukul Gupta, Partner, NDM Advisors LLP, CS Chavvi Gupta, Director (Regulatory Services), NDM Advisors LLP - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 64 (Article)
Cash Flow Statement - CA Bimal R. Bhatt, Ex-Public Interest Director - [2022] 145 taxmann.com 66 (Article)
That’s it from us for today! Stay Tuned for more updates from?Taxmann.com
Register for Taxmann's Live Webinar | Taxation of Share-based Payments
?? 26th November 2022 (Saturday) | ?? 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM (IST)
Register Now for FREE! (Limited Slots Available): https://taxmann.social/WeUud
?? Coverage of the Webinar:
?? Types of Share-based Payments
? Employees' Stock Option Plan
? Sweat Equity Shares
? SAR/Phantom
? CSOP/MSOP/TSOP
?? Eligibility Criteria
? Different share-based payments
?? Criteria for the Valuation of Shares
? Issued under various plans
?? Common Legal Issues
? Between issuer and receiver
?? Implication under Income-tax Act
? In the hands of the issuer and receiver
?? Speaker:
? CA Darshak Shah – Partner | S N & Co.
He was previously working with KPMG and NA Shah Associates. He is also a member of the International Tax Committee of BCAS. He regularly speaks and writes on tax matters for many platforms. He focuses on tax advisory, litigation services and business automation.
?? Relevant For:
? Chartered Accountants
? CA Students
? Accountants in Service
? Businessmen
? Tax Professionals
? Revenue Officers
? Start-up Founders
? Employees
MBA - Finance & Marketing at KITs IMER
2 年??