[2013] 22 ITR (Trib) 673 (Chennai);
Tamil Nadu Cricket Association Vs
- In the instant case the Honourable Chennai Tribunal held that where assessee-cricket association was carrying on revenue earning exercise by arranging international matches, IPL matches etc. in such a way that maximum advertisement revenue was derived from any type of match, its activities did not amount to activity of ‘general public utility’ within meaning of Section 2(15) and, therefore, held that the cancellation of its registration under Section 12AA(3) was justified.
[2013] 214 Taxman 305 (Cal. - HC); 31 taxmann.com 39 (Cal. – HC);
Bagri Impex (P.) Ltd. v. Asst. CIT -
In the instant the Honourable Calcutta High Court held as follows:
(a) The expression ‘transfer’ defined under Section 2(47) was made before section 50C was introduced to the Income-tax Act.
After section 50C was introduced in the year 2003, the value of the land or building or both sold or otherwise transferred has to be the value assessed by the authority of the State Government for the purpose of stamp valuation.
(b) The intention of the Parliament is that where the land or building or both are sold or otherwise transferred, such transfer shall be deemed to have taken place only after the stamp duty has been assessed by the State Government, because it is on the valuation made for the purpose of stamp duty that the tax is payable under the Income-tax Act. The amendment made in the year 2009 may have made the things simpler, but the intention of the Legislature was very clear from the beginning that the value for the purpose of income tax shall be the same as the value for stamp duty.
(c) By adopting devices to defeat the provision, the assessee cannot be heard to contend that section 50C would not be applicable merely because the Deed of Conveyance had not at that time been executed or registered
[2013] 352 ITR 488 (Mad. – HC);
CIT v. R. Sugantha Ravindran –
In the instant case the Honourable Madras High Court held that insertion of words ‘or assessable’ in section 50C by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009 with effect from 01.10.2009 is an inclusion of new class of transactions namely transfer of properties without or before registration and have prospective application only.
[2013] 23 ITR (Trib) 239 (Delhi);
Qualcomm Incorporated v. Addl. CIT
- In the instant case the Honourable Delhi Tribunal held that to tax the royalty income earned by the assessee from original equipment manufacturers located outside India, under the deeming provision of Section 9(1)(vi)(c) of the Act, the burden was on the Revenue to prove that the original equipment manufacturers carried on business in India and that they had used the assessee’s patents for the purpose of, such business in India; or that they had used the assessee’s patents for the purpose of making or earning income from a source in India.
[2013] 214 Taxman 70 (P&H – HC)(Mag.); [2013] 31 2taxmann.com 83 (P&H);
Tarsem Kumar v. ITO –
In the instant case the Honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that revised return, filed before expiry of one year from end of the assessment year, but after receiving intimation under section 143(1)(a), is valid, for the reason that intimation under Section 143(1)(a) does not constitute assessment.
[2013] 214 Taxman 392 (Karn. - HC); 29 taxmann.com 384 (Karn. – HC); CIT v. Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd.
- In the instant case the Honourable Karnataka High Court held that amalgamation does not come within the scope of ‘transfer’ as defined under Section 2(47) of the Act. While holding so, the Court observed that the same view has been taken in the following judicial pronouncements:
(a) CIT v. Master Raghuveer Trust [1985] 151 ITR 368 (Karn. –HC)
(b) Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. v. CIT [1990] 186 ITR 278 (SC)
(c) CIT v. Silical Metallurgic Ltd. [2010] 324 ITR 29 (Mad. – HC)
Thus, the Court held that the instant case was not hit by Section Clause (ii) of 80-I(2) of the Act.
[2013] 23 ITR (Trib) 191 (Chennai);
Aqua Omega Services P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT
- In the instant case Assessee was in business of providing underwater diving services in Saudi Arabia under a contract and paid fees to non-resident divers there. The Assessing Officer held that the services were technical services and fall under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Act.
The Honourable Chennai Tribunal held that since services of non-residents, to whom technical fee was paid by Assessee, were utilized for business carried on outside India for earning income from a source outside India, it was not liable to deduct tax in respect of payments made to non-residents.
[2013] 22 ITR (Trib) 609 (Mumbai);
State Bank of India v. Dy. CIT
- In the instant case for the assessment years 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 regular assessments of the Assessee were completed on 13.02.2004 and 30.12.2004 respectively. A search action under Section 132 of the Act was conducted at the premises of one of the branches of the Assessee on 02.07.2005 pursuant to which the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 153A of the Act on 04.05.2007. Meanwhile, the Assessing Officer also took proceedings under Section 148 for the said assessment years by notices dated 28.08.2006 and 25.07.2006 respectively and completed the assessments on 31.10.2006 by disallowing the excess depreciation invoking the provisions of Section 145(3). He also completed the assessments for these two assessment years on the very same income under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Act.
The Honourable Mumbai Tribunal held that in view of the non obstante clause with which Section 153A(1) opens, the Assessing Officer had no jurisdiction to issue notice under Section 148 of the Act in respect of those six assessments years which fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of Section 153A of the Act and therefore, held that the Assessing Officer was not justified in issuing notices under Section 148 and in completing the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act.
Disclaimer
In this note, we have attempted to summarise some of the significant aspects to be kept in mind by readers to ensure compliance of Income tax laws and regulations. Readers should ensure to verify specific provisions as applicable to each case before taking any business decisions. It would be pertinent to note that some changes are being made to the Income tax laws and rules and regulations on a continuous basis by way of notifications, clarifications etc issued by the department based on their practical experience in implementing the legislation.
It may be noted that nothing contained in this note should be regarded as our opinion. Professional advice should be sought for applicability of legal provisions based on specific facts. Though reasonable efforts have been taken to avoid errors or omissions in this note we are not responsible for any liability arising to readers directly or indirectly due to any mis-statements or error contained in this note. It must be noted that the views expressed in the note are based on our understanding of the law and regulations as published by the Government authorities and we may or may not agree or subscribe to such views/ interpretations.
No comments:
Post a Comment