Pages

Pages

Topics

Pages

Sunday, February 28, 2021

CBIC extend the levy of ADD on Melamine originating in or exported from China PR

CBIC extend the levy of ADD on Melamine originating in or exported from China PR

[TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, EXTRAORDINARY, PART II, SECTION 3, SUB-SECTION (i)]

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE)

Notification No. 10/2021-Customs (ADD)

New Delhi, 25th February, 2021

G.S.R.–(E). -Whereas, the designated authority vide initiation notification No. 7/32/2020-DGTR, dated the 22nd September, 2020, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I, Section 1, dated the 22nd September, 2020, has initiated review in terms of sub-section (5) of section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Customs Tariff Act) read with rule 23 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the said rules), in the matter of continuation of anti-dumping duty on imports of ‘Melamine’ (hereinafter referred to as subject goods) originating in or exported from China PR (hereinafter referred to as subject country), imposed vide notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 2/2016-Customs (ADD), dated the 28th January, 2016, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 122(E), dated the 28th January, 2016, and had requested for extension of the said anti-dumping duty in terms of sub-section (5) of section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act;

And whereas, the Central Government had extended the anti-dumping duty on the subject goods, originating in or exported from the subject country up to and inclusive of the 28th February, 2021, vide notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 1/2021-Customs (ADD), dated the 6th January, 2021, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 7(E), dated the 6th January, 2021;

And whereas, the designated authority has requested for further extension of the antidumping duty on the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject country.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (5) of section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, read with rules 18 and 23 of the said rules, the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 2/2016- Customs (ADD), dated the 28th January, 2016, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 122(E), dated the 28th January, 2016, namely:-

In the said notification, in paragraph 3, for the figures and word “28th February, 2021”, the figures and word “31st March, 2021” shall be substituted.

[F. No. 354/28/2004-TRU (Pt-II)]

(Rajeev Ranjan)
Under Secretary to the Government of India

Note: The principal notification No. 2/2016-Customs (ADD), dated the 28th January, 2016 was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 122(E), dated the 28th January, 2016 and was last amended vide notification No. 1/2021-Customs (ADD), dated the 6th January, 2021, published vide number G.S.R. 7 (E), dated the 6th January, 2021.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3dQmUHM

FAQs for Seek VC & Seek VC adjournment

FAQs for Seek VC & Seek VC adjournment

What is VC?

Answer: VC stands for ‘Video Conferencing’. Using the VC facility, an assessee is enabled to express or submit one’s response orally before an Income Tax Authority who has initiated the proceeding and expect the response from the user.

This facility has been enabled by the department as a substitute for personal appearance/hearing before an Income Tax Authority.

The facility for oral submission is in addition to submitting response in writing.

Who can avail VC?

Answer: It can be availed by only those taxpayers for whom a hyperlink VC is enabled against a notice, as appearing in the e-Proceeding module, under the column “Video Conferencing”.

Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->

 

What is the process to seek VC facility?

Answer: If a VC hyperlink is found against a notice issued by the department under the column “Video Conferencing”, the user needs to click on that hyperlink.

On clicking, another window appears with the notice details prefilled.

  • Click on the hyperlink “Seek VC”.

 

  • On click on the same, a window appears. The user needs to choose the appropriate reason from the drop-down values. If there are no predefined dropdown, the user may select “Others” and enter the description in text box.
  • Thereafter, a text box will appear wherein user needs to provide reasons in detail for seeking VC and also can provide the date on which the user desires to submit oral submission. (Maximum 4000 characters)
  • If the user wants to upload any document supporting such a claim, there is provision to attach the same by click the button “choose File”. The document that are PDF format can only be attached and should not exceed 5 MB.
  • Now Click, submit button. A success message will be displayed on submission of request.

 

How to check the status of VC request raised?

Answer: VC request raised by assessee will either be approved or rejected. If approved, then the department will send an email and SMS communication informing the date and time for VC along with VC URL. The VC details will be displayed in the user’s e-proceeding VC Notice schedule. The login password will be shared 2 hours before the scheduled time of VC on to the registered mobile number. If rejected, then rejection remarks and rejection letter will be displayed to the assessee in VC Notice schedule in addition to email and SMS communication.

Below are the steps to check the status of VC request :

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click VC hyperlink under the Video conferencing column. On click of VC hyperlink, the details of VC request submitted will be displayed.

 

  • If request is approved, scheduled date & time of VC will be displayed under the column “VC date & Time” and status will be displayed as “Approved”. Under ITD Remarks column “VC Schedule Notice” will be displayed in hyperlink to view and download. ‘VC link’ will be visible 2 hours before the scheduled time of VC under the ‘VC link details’ column.

 

  • If request is rejected, status will be displayed as “Rejected”. Under ITD Remarks column “Remarks” and “Rejection letter” will be displayed in hyperlink to view and download along with email & SMS communication.

 

What if VC date and time given is not suitable?

Answer: If the VC date and time given by the department is not suitable for any reason an adjournment request to some another date and time from the existing date and time can be submitted through a functionality “Seek VC adjournment”. The request for adjournment will have to be submitted before the expiry of VC date and time. Once expired, no request for adjournment can be submitted.

How to avail VC adjournment?

Answer: A hyperlink “Seek VC adjournment” is enabled in VC window against a notice in the e-Proceeding module under the column “Video Conferencing”.

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click VC hyperlink against a notice issued by the department under the column “Video Conferencing”.
  • Click on the hyperlink “Seek VC Adjournment”.
  • On click on the same, a window appears. The user needs to choose the appropriate reason from the drop-down values. If there are no predefined dropdown, the user may select “Others” and enter the description in the text box.
  • Thereafter, a text box will appear wherein user needs to provide reasons in detail. (Maximum 4000 characters)
  • If the user wants to upload any document supporting such a claim, there is provision to attach the same by click the button “browse”. The document that can be attached are in PDF and should not exceed 5 MB.
  • Now Click, submit button. A success message will be displayed on submission of request.

How to check the status of VC adjournment request raised?

Answer : VC adjournment request raised will either be approved or rejected. If approved, then department will share the fresh date and time for VC and VC link through email as well as displayed in the e-filing account. The password will be shared 2 hours before the scheduled time of VC on the registered mobile number. If rejected, then rejection remarks will be displayed as well as send by email.

Steps to Check to VC adjournment request

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click VC hyperlink under the Video conferencing column. On click the details of VC request submitted will be displayed.
  • If adjournment request is approved, new date & time of VC will be displayed under the column “VC date & Time” along with email and SMS communication. The status will be displayed as “Approved”. Under ITD Remarks column “Remarks” and “Adjournment acceptance Letter” will be displayed in hyperlink to view and download. VC link will be visible 2 hours before the scheduled time of VC under the VC link details column.
  • If adjournment request is rejected, status will be displayed as “Rejected”. Under ITD Remarks column “Remarks” will be displayed in hyperlink to view along with email and SMS communication.

How to join video conferencing?

Answer :

  • Copy the VC URL communicated by the department on to an Internet browser URL address bar and press enter key
  • The VC site will open to provide User name and password.
  • User name should be of the taxpayer to whom the notice is issued and the password would be that is communicated to the taxpayer’s e-filing registered primary mobile number two hours prior to the VC date and time.
  • The VC URL details can also be obtained from the e-filing Login under e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click on VC hyperlink against the respective notice->click VC link hyperlink to view the link to join VC

What other additional points to be taken in consideration while joining VC?

Answer :

  • Kindly keep identification document like Aadhaar, PAN Card, Passport or any other government issued identification document handy and share when asked for.
  • Kindly keep handy softcopy of all the documents on which you want to place reliance during the Video Conference (VC) which may be shared during video conference.
  • Switch on the video & audio and make sure that your face is properly visible and voice is audible.

What will happen if Video conferencing couldn’t be conducted due to any technical issues/other issues?

Answer: If VC couldn’t be conducted on scheduled date and time due to any technical issue/other issue, Department will cancel the existing scheduled VC and share new date and time for video conferencing and VC link and password (2 hours before the scheduled time of VC on the registered mobile number) for joining the meeting along with email and SMS communication.

Steps to Check the details of cancelled and rescheduled video conferencing

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click VC hyperlink under the Video conferencing column. On click the details of VC will be displayed.

Who can join VC? Can Authorized Representative also join the VC meeting?

Answer : Only assessee can join VC. If any authorized representative has been appointed through the e-filing account for such proceeding, then both assessee and authorized representative can join.

Would department provide the copy of the recording of video conferencing? If yes, how to obtain the same?

Answer: Yes, after video conferencing is successfully conducted. ‘VC recording’ hyperlink will be displayed under “VC link details” column. Under the ‘VC recording’ hyper link, the URL details from which the recording can be downloaded will be mentioned. The Status and VC recording noting made by the Income Tax Authority will be available under “ITD Remarks”. The recording will be made available within a reasonable period, not exceeding two days of recording. The recoding can be downloaded from the portal through which the video conferencing was held.

Steps to check the recording of video conferencing availability and the URL details from which it can be downloaded.

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click VC hyperlink under the Video conferencing column. On click the details of VC will be displayed.

  • Click on VC recording hyperlink, a pop up will open with the link of VC recording. Enter the URL link in an internet browser address bar to view and download recorded VC.

FAQs – on Seek adjournment

What is seek adjournment?

Answer: Seek adjournment is a functionality provided to an assessee to submit a request to extend the response due date of a notice issued by an Income Tax Authority if the assessee is unable to submit response within the notice submission timelines mentioned.

Who can avail seek adjournment facility?

Answer: Those taxpayers for whom a hyperlink “Seek” is enabled against a notice, as appearing in the e-Proceeding module under the column “Seek/View adjournment”.

 

How to seek adjournment?

Answer :

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click Seek hyperlink against a notice issued by the department under the column “Seek/View adjournment”.

  • Click on the hyperlink “Seek Adjournment”.
  • On click on the same, a window appears. The user needs to choose the ‘adjournment sought up to date’ by choosing any date from the calendar provided against this menu. Select appropriate reason from the drop-down values. If there are no predefined as a dropdown, the user may select “Others” and enter the description in the text box.
  • It may be noted that at any given point of time, an adjournment request exceeding 15 calendar days from the notice due date shall be entertained.
  • Thereafter, a text box will appear wherein user needs to provide reasons in detail.(Maximum 4000 characters)
  • If the user wants to upload any document supporting such a claim, there is provision to attach it by click the button “browse”. The document that can be attached are in PDF and should not exceed 5 MB.
  • Click Submit button and a success message will be displayed on submission of request.

Is there any date limit up to which adjournment request can be sought?

Answer : Yes,

  • If adjournment is sought before the response due date then up to 15 calendar days from notice response due date
  • If adjournment is sought after response due date then up to 15 calendar days from the date of seeking adjournment.
  • However, no adjournment request can be raised for a date falling within 7 days prior to the “Proceeding Limitation Date”.

How to know the status of adjournment request raised?

Answer : Adjournment request will either be approved or rejected. If approved, the approved extended date will reflected under “Adjourned date for submission of response” and the taxpayer can submit response till such extended date. If rejected, then taxpayer can submit response till the existing response due date or till such period the Income Tax Authority permits such submission. Both email and SMS communication will be send on the status of the request submitted.

Steps to Check to adjournment request

  • Login to e-Filing->e-Proceeding->Select Proceeding Name ->
  • Click View hyperlink under the “Seek/View Adjournment” column. On click the details of adjournment request submitted will be displayed.

  • If request is approved, Adjourned date will be displayed under “Adjourned date for submission of response” column and status will be displayed as “Approved”.

  • If request is rejected, status will be displayed as “Rejected”. Under ITD Remarks column “Remarks” will be displayed.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/2O7mZfs

ITAT deletes Capital Gain brought to tax under Section 50C of Income Tax Act

ITAT deletes Capital Gain brought to tax under Section 50C of Income Tax Act

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

The Text of the Order as follows :

This is an appeal of the assessee against the order dated 24.05.2019 of CIT(A)-6, Bengaluru, relating to Assessment Year 2011-12. At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that he does not wish to press for adjudication ground No.2 raised by the Revenue with regard to the challenge to the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’).

2. The only ground that needs to be adjudicated int his appeal is as to whether the Revenue authorities were justified in bringing to tax as capital gain a sum fo Rs.25,53,315/- by invoking the provisions of section 50C of the Act.

3. The assessee is an individual. For Assessment Year 2011-12, he filed return of income on 16.09.2011 declaring a total income of Rs.18,83,160/-. This return was accepted under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened under section 148 of the Act by issue of a notice dated 30.03.2018. The reasons for issue of notice were that the Assessee sold two shops at Cavalry Road, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as “the property”) under a sale deed dated 10.8.2009 for a sale consideration of Rs.32,27;010/-. The value adopted by the registering authority for the purpose of stamp duty and registration charges i.e., as per guideline valuation was Rs:57,80,325/-. The Assessee had not disclosed the capital gain on sale of the property, the AO initiated proceedings for reassessment to assess capital gain that escaped assessment.

4. In the reassessment proceedings, the Assessee took a stand that Section 45(1) of the Act clearly lays down that any gain arising on the transfer of the capital asset effected in the previous year shall be chargeable to income tax under the head “capital gain” and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. Section 2(47) of the Act defines transfer which includes a sale. The sale deed was executed by the Assessee on 10.08.2019 and was presented for registration on 10.08.2009. Since the parties disputed the value adopted by the registering authorities for the purpose of stamp duty and registration, the matter was referred to the District Registrar and determined the value of the property for the purpose of stamp duty and registration at a sum of Rs.57,80,325/-. This order of the District Registrar was passed on 31.03.2010. The assessee paid the stamp duty as demanded by the registering authorities on 26.06.2010 and the document was registered on 26.06.2010. Since the sale deed was executed on 10.08.2009 which falls within the Financial Year 2009-10 relevant to the Assessment Year 2010-11, the capital gain in question cannot be brought to tax in Assessment Year 2011-12.

5. The AO however wanted to tax the difference between the value adopted by the registering authorities at Rs.57,80,325/- and the sale consideration between the parties at a sum of Rs.32,23,000/- viz., a sum of Rs.25,53,315/- in Assessment Year 2011-12 on the ground that since the document was ultimately registered on 26.06.2010 Assessment Year 2011-12 will be the year in which the provisions of section 50C of the Act would be attracted and according brought to tax a sum of Rs.25,53,315/-. The AO held that since higher value was fixed for stamp duty purpose during the AY.2011-12 and as such the deemed capital gains accrued to the assessee for AY: 2011-12. The AO also observed that the Assessee’s stand that capital gain on sale of property it is assessable for AY 2010-11, is only for the reason that, it is not possible to re-open the assessment for AY 2010-11 now, as the-same is already barred by limitation of time for re-opening. For the above reasons, the AO brought to tax additional capital gain of Rs.25,53,315/-, which accrued to the assessee, by applying provision of.Sec.50C, for the AY 2011-12, being the year of accrual.

6. It was the case of the assessee before the CIT(A) that there was no transfer of the capital asset in the previous year relevant to Assessment Year 2011-12 because the sale deed is dated 10.08.2009 which falls within Assessment Year 2010-11. It was further pleaded by the assessee that the date on which the document is registered is not the date of transfer and it is only the date of sale deed which can be regarded as the date of transfer. The assessee placed reliance on the provisions of section 47 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, which provides that a registered document shall operate from the time from which it would have commenced to operate if no registration thereof had been required or made, and not from the time of its registration. The CIT(A) however did not agree with the stand taken by the assessee and he agreed with the view of the AO that section 50C would be applicable in Assessment Year 2011-12 because it is only in Assessment Year 2011-12 that the value for the purpose of stamp duty and registration was fixed by the registering authorities. The CIT(A) also drew support from the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of M/s. Bagri Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT (2013) 31 taxmann.com 39 (Calcutta). In that case, full consideration on transfers was received in one year and the registration of the sale deed happened in a subsequent Assessment Year. The application of section 50C of the Act in another Assessment Year, which is neither the year of receipt of sale consideration nor the year of determination of valuation by the registering authority u/s.50C, was upheld by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court.

7. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. Learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the stand of the assessee as was put forth before the CIT(A). He further relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurbax Singh Vs. Kartar Singh and Others 254 ITR 112 (SC). In the aforesaid decision, the Hon’ble Supreme Court took a view that in view of the provisions of section 47 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, a document will take effect from the time when it was executed and not from the time of its registration. The learned Counsel also distinguished the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court by pointing out that in that case, the assessee offered capital gains for taxation in the year of receipt i.e., 2006-07 but the sale deed had been executed in Assessment Year 2007-08 and registration took place in the year 2008-09. The assessee had offered the capital gain to tax in Assessment Year 2006-07. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court upheld levy of capital gain in AY 2006-07 by applying provisions of Sec.50C of the Act. He pointed out that the decision has to be read with the peculiar facts and circumstances of that case and not applicable to the present case. He also pointed out that section 50C of the Act was amended w.e.f. 01.10.2009 substituting the word ‘assessed’ by the word ‘assessable’. It was in this context that the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court upheld the Revenue’s contention. Learned DR for the Revenue reiterated the stand of the Revenue as contained in the order of AO and CIT(A). He also relied on a decision of the ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Sri J.Appa Rao Vs. ACIT ITA No.`518/Hyd/2010 order dated 29.11.2013.

8. I have given a careful consideration to the rival submissions and I find that the sale deed in the present case was executed by the assessee selling two shops at Cavalry Road on 10.08.2009. The sale deed operates from the date on which it was executed and there are no covenants regarding the period of operation of sale under the sale deed to have been postponed. Because of dispute with regard to valuation, the registration could be completed only on 26.06.2010. That will not postpone the date of vesting of title in favour of the transferee from the date of sale. As per section 47 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, the sale by the assessee to the transferee would operate from 10.08.2009. Therefore transfer by way of sale of the property took place on 10.8.2009.

9. Under section 45(1) of the Act, the charge on capital gain is in the year of transfer. Section 45(1) of the Act clearly lays down that any gain arising on the transfer of the capital asset effected in the previous year shall be chargeable to income tax under the head “capital gain” and shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. Section 2(47) of the Act defines transfer which includes a sale. The transfer in the present case is “sale” and since sale in the present case has taken place in the previous year relevant to Assessment Year 2010-11, the capital gain in question cannot be brought to tax in Assessment Year 2011-12. This aspect has been accepted by the AO in the order of assessment. Because the assessment for Assessment Year 2010-11 was barred by time and could not be reopened, he resorted to the provisions of Sec.50C of the Act and taxed deemed accrued capital gain. Section 48 of the Act lays down that capital gain has to be computed by reducing from the full value of consideration received or accruing as a result of transfer expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer and the cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of improvement if any. Sec.50C of the Act is a Special provision for full value of consideration in certain cases and it lays down that where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed [or assessable] by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the “stamp valuation authority:”) for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed [or assessable] shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer. Sec.50C of the Act substitutes the full value of consideration received or accruing on transfer which otherwise would be the value as envisaged u/s.48 of the Act. Sec.50C of the Act is therefore an exception to Sec.48 of the Act in certain circumstances. Section 50C of the Act does not operate to change the year of transfer as laid down in section 45(1) of the Act.

10. Section 45 of the Act is a charging section as far as capital gain on transfer of capital asset is concerned. Section 48 is a machinery or computation provision. A transaction to which those provisions cannot be applied must be regarded as never intended by Section 45 of the Act to be a subject of charge. This inference flows from the general arrangement of the provisions in the Act whereunder each head of income the charging provision is accompanied by a set of provisions for computing the income subject to that charge. Referring to the fundamental integrality of the statutory scheme provided for capital gains, the Supreme Court observed in B.C. Srinivasa Betty’s case 128 ITR 294 (SC) at p. 299 of the report;

“Section 45 charges the profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset to income-tax. The asset must be one which falls within the contemplation of the section. It must bear that quality which brings s. 45 into play. To determine whether the goodwill of a new business is such an asset, it is permissible, as we shall presently show, to refer to certain other sections of the head, “Capital gains“. Section 45 is a charging section. For the purpose of imposing the charge, Parliament has enacted detailed provisions in order to compute the profits or gains under that head. No existing principle or provision at variance with them can be applied for determining the chargeable profits and gains. All transactions encompassed by s. 45 must fall under the governance of its computation provisions. A transaction to which those provisions cannot be applied must be regarded as never intended by s. 45 to be the subject of the charge. This inference flows from the general arrangement of the provisions in the Income-tax Act, where under each head of income the charging provision is accompanied by a set of provisions for computing the income subject to that charge. The character of the computation provisions in each case bears a relationship to the nature of the charge. Thus the charging section and the computation provisions together constitute an integrated code. When there is a case to which the computation provisions cannot apply at all, it is evident that such a case was not intended to fall within the charging section. Otherwise one would be driven to conclude that while a certain income seems to fall within the charging section there is no scheme of computation for quantifying it. The legislative pattern discernible in the Act is against such a conclusion. It must be borne in mind that the legislative intent is presumed to run uniformly through the entire conspectus of provisions pertaining to each head of income. No doubt there is a qualitative difference between the charging provision and a computation provision. And ordinarily the operation of the charging provision cannot be affected by the construction of a particular computation provision. But the question here is whether it is possible to apply the computation provision at all if a certain interpretation is pressed on the charging provision. That pertains to the fundamental integrality of the statutory scheme provided for each head.” (emphasis supplied)

The reverse inference that can be drawn on the basis of the aforesaid observations underlined, is that if there is no charge to tax on capital gain in AY 2011-12 u/s.45(1) of the Act, the computation provision u/s.48 of the Act, cannot operate to create a charge.

11. The decision referred to by the learned Counsel for the Revenue of the Calcutta High Court is on different facts and not applicable to the present case. In the case of Bagri Impex (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-9, Kolkata, (2013) 31 taxmann.com 39 Calcutta, the facts were that the Assessee was owner of 2/5th share in a land situate at Kolkata. The case of the assessee was that the land in question or the interest of the assessee was agreed to be sold on 15th October, 1996 to 15 several buyers. Deeds of conveyance in favour of five buyers were executed on 15.1.1998. The balance 10 deeds of conveyance were executed on 26th May, 2006 and registered on 27th November, 2007. The stamp duty was assessed on 27th November, 2007. The assessee offered capital gain on sale for taxation in AY 2006-07. Therefore in AY 2006-07 neither the sale deed was executed nor registered. The AO applied the provisions of Sec.50-C of the Act and determined capital gain based on the value adopted by the registering authority for the purpose of stamp duty and registration charges. Case of the assessee was that it had received money before executing the deed of conveyance and therefore the provisions of Sec.50C of the Act were not applicable. Sec.50C of the Act was inserted by the Finance Act, 2002 w.e.f 1-4-2003 and was as follows:

“Special provision for full value of consideration in certain cases.

50C.(1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the “stamp valuation authority:”) for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer.”

The provisions were amended by the Finance Act, 2009 w.e.f 1-10-2009 by adding the word “Assesseable” after the word adopted or assessed. After the amendment with effect from 1st October, 2009 the provision of Section 50C stood as follows:

“Special provision for full value of consideration in certain cases.

50C.(1) Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer by an assessee of a capital asset, being land or building or both, is less than the value adopted or assessed [or assessable] by any authority of a State Government (hereafter in this section referred to as the “stamp valuation authority:”) for the purpose of payment of stamp duty in respect of such transfer, the value so adopted or assessed [or assessable] shall, for the purposes of section 48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer.”

The case of the assessee was that the provision of Section 50C has no manner of application because on the date when he received the money by way of sale proceeds neither the deed of conveyance had been executed and naturally it could not have been registered on that date. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court had to decide the following substantial question of law: viz.,

“Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in law in not considering that the words “or assessable” was introduced in section 50C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with effect from 1st October, 2009 and thus erred in taking the value of the capital asset as assessed by the Stamp Valuation Authority on 27th November, 2007 instead of actual transfer price for the relevant assessment year 2006-07?”

The Court held as follows:

“7. We have not been impressed by this submission. It is true that ‘Transfer’ has been defined in Section 2(47) quoted above. But the aforesaid definition 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. The submission that in the financial year 2005-06 when the consideration was received, the Deed of Conveyance had not even been executed has not found favour with us for the simple reason that the intention of the Parliament is that in a case 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. 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. The contention that the property stood transferred in the financial year 2005-06 when the sale proceeds were received on the basis of the definition appearing from s.2(47)(v) of the I.T. Act is without any substance for reasons already discussed. The assessee itself did not follow s.2(47)(v) of the I.T. Act because it did not offer the transfer for taxation in the year 1996 when the possession is claimed to have been made over on the basis of the agreements for sale in accordance with s.2(47)(v) quoted above. Designs to evade tax cannot be permitted. The Assessing Officer on the date of assessment for the assessment year 2006-2007 had before him the valuation made by the State for the purpose of stamp duty and rightly applied the same.”

12. The aforesaid decision is not applicable to the facts of the present case as there was no device adopted by the Assessee to ensure that provisions of Sec.50C of the Act were not applicable to his case. Secondly, the registration was completed in the case before the Hon’ble Calcutta High on 27.11.2007 i.e., in AY 2008-09 but the case before the Hon’ble Court related to AY 2006-07. The Court was interpreting the term “assesseable” and countered the contention of the Assessee that prior to the amendment of Sec.50C of the Act w.e.f 1-10-2009, it is only cases where the valuation is completed in the relevant AY that provisions of Sec.50C of the Act can be applied. In the present case, no such devise to evade tax has been pleaded by the revenue nor a plea has been taken by the Assessee that sale having taken place earlier to the execution or registration of sale , provisions of Sec.50C of the Act are not applicable. As rightly contended by the learned Counsel for the assessee, it was a decision rendered on the scope of amendment to section 50C of the Act w.e.f. 01.10.2009.

13. The decision referred to by the learned DR in the case of J.Appa Rao(supra) is a case where it was held that applicability of the provisions of Sec.50C of the Act is mandatory w.e.f .1-4-2003. This decision does not in any way support the case of the revenue regarding the year in which capital gain is liable to be taxed.

14. For the reasons given above, I hold that the capital gain in question cannot be brought to tax in Assessment Year 2011-12. The Revenue authorities erred in bringing to tax the capital gain in Assessment Year 2011-12. The addition made by the AO is accordingly directed to be deleted.

15. In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed.

Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/2PgwkSt

MCA signing Data Exchange MoU with CBIC

MCA signing Data Exchange MoU with CBIC

PRESS RELEASE

A formal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed today between the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), Ministry Of Finance for data exchange between the two organizations. The MoU was signed by Shri Manoj Pandey, Joint Secretary MCA and Shri B. B. Gupta, ADG, CBIC in the presence of Secretary, MCA and Chairman, CBIC.

The MoU is in line with the vision of MCA and CBIC to harness data capabilities to ensure effective enforcement. Both the organizations are going to benefit from access to each other’s databases which include details of import-export transactions and consolidated financial statements of companies registered in the country. The data sharing arrangement gains significance in light of development of MCA21 Version 3 which will utilize state of the art technology for enhancing ease of doing business in India and improve the regulatory enforcement and similar steps by CBIC like the launch of ADVAIT (Advanced Analytics in Indirect Taxation) a 360-degree taxpayer profiling tool. AI/ML, data analytics will play a critical role in achieving this synergy.

The MoU will facilitate the sharing of data and information between MCA and CBIC on an automatic and regular basis. It will enable sharing of specific information such as details of Bill of Entry (Imports), Shipping Bill (Exports) Summary from CBIC and financial statements filed with the Registrar by corporates, returns of allotment of shares. The MoU will ensure that both MCA and CBIC have seamless linkage for regulatory purposes. In addition to regular exchange of data, MCA and CBIC will also exchange with each other, on request, any information available in their respective databases, for the purpose of carrying out scrutiny, inspection, investigation and prosecution.

Technology and data will play a critical role going forward in fulfilling the Government’s vision of minimum government, maximum governance and both MCA and CBIC are well placed to fulfill this vision.

The MoU comes into force from the date it was signed and is an ongoing initiative of MCA and CBIC, who are already collaborating through various existing mechanisms. A Data Exchange Steering Group also has been constituted for the initiative, which will meet periodically to review the data exchange status and take steps to further improve the effectiveness of the data sharing mechanism.

The MoU marks the beginning of a new era of cooperation and synergy between the two organizations.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3r31lHC

GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C Filing due date extended to 31.03.2021 for FY 2019-20

GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C Filing due date extended to 31.03.2021 for FY 2019-20

It may be noted that the due date for furnishing of the GST Annual returns & GST Audit (GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C) specified under section 44 of the CGST Act read with rule 80 of the CGST rules for the financial year 2019-20 was earlier extended from 31.12.2020 to 28.02.2021 vide Notification No. 95/2020- Central Tax dated 30.12.2020. In view of the difficulties expressed by the taxpayers in meeting this time limit, Government has decided to further extend the due date for furnishing of GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C for the financial year 2019-20 to 31.03.2021 with the approval of Election Commission of India. This press note is being issued to keep taxpayers informed so that they may plan their return filing accordingly. Suitable notification to give effect to this decision is being issued.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3r1BqAg

Friday, February 26, 2021

CBDT again extends due date for filing declaration under ‘Vivad Se Vishwas’ Scheme

CBDT again extends due date for filing declaration under ‘Vivad Se Vishwas’ Scheme

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 26th February, 2021

S.O. 964(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020 (3 of 2020), the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, (Department of Revenue), number 85/2020, dated the 27th October, 2020, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), vide number S.O. 3847(E), dated 27th October, 2020, namely:––

In the said notification,––

(i) in clause (a), for the figures, letters and words “28th day of February, 2021” the figures, letters and words “31st day of March, 2021” shall be substituted;

(ii) in clause (b), for the figures, letters and words “31st day of March, 2021” the figures, letters and words “30th day of April, 2021” shall be substituted; and

(iii) in clause (c), for the figures, letters and words “1st day of April, 2021” the figures, letters and words “1st day of May, 2021” shall be substituted.

[Notification No. 09/2021/ F.No. IT(A)/01/2020-TPL]

SHEFALI SINGH, Under Secy., Tax Policy & Legislation Division

Note: The principal notification was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the 27th October, 2020 vide number S.O. 3847(E), dated 27th October, 2020 and was subsequently amended by notification number S.O. 4804(E), dated 31st December, 2020 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the 31st December, 2020 and notification number S.O. 471(E), dated 31st January, 2021 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II Section 3, Subsection (ii) dated the 31st January, 2021.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3r0kBWk

No Extension in due date of GST Annual Return & Audit: Bombay HC

No Extension in due date of GST Annual Return & Audit: Bombay HC

Heard Mr. P. C. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. Anil Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General along with Mr. P. S. Jetly, learned senior counsel, Mr. J. B. Mishra and Mr. Devesh Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3; and Ms. Jyoti Chavan, learned AGP for respondent No.2-State.

2. Goods and Service Tax Practitioners’ Association, Mumbai and its President Shri. Raj Pravin Shah as the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition under Articles 226 / 227 of the Constitution of India for a direction to the respondents to extend the periodicity of filing of annual returns in the State of Maharashtra until complete lock-down is lifted or until the covid-19 pandemic situation improves completely. In continuation of the aforesaid prayer, petitioners seek further direction to the respondents to extend periodicity of limitation of filing of annual returns for the year 2019-20 in the State of Maharashtra under section 44

of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 80 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 upto 30.06.2021.

3. It is submitted that in terms of section 44 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (briefly ‘the CGST Act’ hereinafter) and rule 80 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (briefly ‘the CGST Rules’ hereinafter), every registered person is required to file annual return for every financial year in the electronic form before 31st day of December following the end of such financial year. In the case of the financial year 2019-20, the date for filing such annual return was 31.12.2020. By notification No.95/2020 dated 30.12.2020, the time-limit for furnishing such annual return for the financial year 2019-20 was extended till 28.02.2021.

4. It has been averred in the writ petition that covid-19 pandemic particularly in the State of Maharashtra is not yet over. Rather in recent days, there has been an increase in the number of cases of people being infected with covid-19. Lock-down imposed in the State of Maharashtra has not yet been completely withdrawn. As a matter of fact, several areas in the State of Maharashtra have seen fresh lock-downs in different forms in the recent past.

5. It is further submitted that filing or furnishing of annual return is dependent upon finalization of audit report under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Though the date for finalization of audit report under the Income Tax Act, 1961 is 30th day of September of the preceding year, for the financial year 2019-20 the due date under the Income Tax Act, 1961 was extended upto 15.01.2021. In other words, Chartered Accountants responsible for furnishing annual returns under the CGST Act would have less than 45 days after finalization of audit report under the Income Tax Act, 1961 to file annual return under section 44 of the CGST Act.

6. Because of the aforesaid reasons, petitioners had represented before the Grievance Redressal Committee, Pune on 08.01.2021. Finding no response, they made a further representation to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council on 11.02.2021. As no decision was forthcoming, present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs as indicated above.

7. Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that following amendment to section 44 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, a proviso has been inserted therein as per which the Commissioner may on the recommendation of the GST Council and for reasons to be recorded in writing by a notification extend the time- limit for furnishing the annual return for such class of registered persons as may be specified therein. Further, any extension of time-limit notified by the Commissioner of Central Tax shall be deemed to be notified by the Commissioner under the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He further submits that there is no involvement of revenue in the matter as extension of time limit would not result in loss of any revenue. Looking into the genuine hardship faced by the members of petitioner No.1 and taxable persons, he submits that such discretionary power is required to be exercised by the Commissioner in the interest of justice. He has also referred to section 168A of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to contend that such extension of time-limit should be allowed if furnishing of annual returns within the extended time-limit upto 28.02.2021 cannot be completed or complied with due to force majeure, which has been explained to mean epidemic etc., in this case covid-19.

7.1. He has also referred to the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated 05.02.2020 in the case of Tax Bar Association Vs. Union of India wherein a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court had directed that Tax Bar Association and the assessees represented by the Association may keep uploading their returns for which no late fee would be charged till 12.02.2020. It may be mentioned that the litigation before the Rajasthan High Court pertained to extension of time for the financial year 2017-18 on account of non-functioning of GSTN portal.

8. Mr. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General has referred to and relied upon written instructions dated 25.02.2021 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing and addressed to the Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Mumbai South Commissionerate. He submits therefrom that the government has been considerate of the difficulties faced by the tax payers due to covid-19 pandemic and accordingly, the due date for filing annual returns and reconciliation statements has been extended. Timeline for filing such return and statement for the financial year 2019-20 has already been extended from 31.12.2020 to 28.02.2021 considering the difficulties faced by the tax payers. It is stated that annual return prescribed under section 44 of the CGST Act is not a new compliance; rather is is a reconciliation of GST returns filed by the tax payer. Audit being an important compliance-verification tool in self-assessment regime, effectiveness of tax administration would be compromised if the due date for filing these returns is extended repeatedly. Referring to the Rajasthan High Court judgment, Mr. Singh submits that the portion of the order of the Rajasthan High Court which had extended the deadline for submitting returns has been stayed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P. No.3839 of 2020 vide order dated 10.02.2020.

9. Ms. Chavan, learned AGP submits that State of Maharashtra has no independent say in the matter. Referring to section 44 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, she submits that the Commissioner can extend the time-limit only upon recommendations made by the GST Council. On his own, he cannot extend the time-limit. GST Council’s views have been expressed by Mr. Singh. Therefore, there is no possibility of extension of time-limit by the Maharashtra Commissioner.

10. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have received the due consideration of the Court.

11. On due consideration, we are not inclined to accede to the prayer made by the petitioners that too at this eleventh hour. It is not that the time-limit has not been extended. The initial due date of 31.12.2020 has been extended to 28.02.2021. That apart, on going through the relevant provisions of the CGST Act, more particularly the provision of section 47(2) thereof, we do not find that non-extension of the time-limit beyond 28.02.2021 would lead to any extinguishment of right. We find from the written instructions dated 25.02.2021 that vide notification No.77 of 2020 – Central Tax dated 15.10.2020 filing of annual return in the prescribed form for businesses with annual turnover upto Rs.2 crores has been made optional for the financial years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019- 20; and for businesses with annual turnover upto Rs.5 crores filing of the prescribed form for the financial years 2018-19 and 2019-20 has been waived off vide notification No.79/2000 – Central Tax dated 15.10.2020. We also take note of the fact that it is the professional body of GST practitioners who are before us and not any individual taxable person expressing any difficulty in adhering to the extended timeline of 28.02.2021.

12. In the circumstances, Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

(MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.)



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/2ZQNdVY

GST levied on Capital Subsidy for Green Field Public Street Lighting System

GST levied on Capital Subsidy for Green Field Public Street Lighting System

ODISHA AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING

It was submitted that the applican is engaged in the business of executing Greenfield street lighting project. The Government of Odisha, through the Housing and Urban Development Department, the Urban Infrastructure Development Fund and the Directorate of Municipal Administration has decided to develop an energy efficient street lighting system covering new and upcoming road stretches in Greenfield areas across 21 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), including in the cities of Balasore, Bhadrak, Jajpur, Baripada on a Public Private Partnership basis.

For this purpose, the Odisha Urban Infrastructure Development Fund issued a Request for proposal based on an open bidding process. The Applicant has madea successful bid for the said tender and has consequently entered into an agreement on 29.12.2018 for design, supply, installation, operation, maintenance and transfer of the energy efficient Greenfield Public Street Lighting System and the Centralized Control & Monitoring System with the Government of Odisha represented by the Directorate of Municipal Administration (“the Authority”) and the ULBs. The Agreement provides that the initial term of the Agreement shall be 7 years. Under the Agreement, the Applicant undertakes to supply and install equipment such as LED Luminaire, feeder panels, poles, outreach arms, cables/wires with holding arrangement for overhead supply cables, in respect of both, the Greenfield Public Street Lighting System as well as the Centralized Control & Monitoring System.

It was submitted that for such installation, the Applicant is entitled to receive a consideration, in the form of Capital Subsidy, being 90% of the total capital expenditure incurred by the Applicant in supplying, installing and commissioning of the equipment. The balance 10% of the total capital expenditure along-with O&M fees is receivable as ‘Annuity fees’, and is recovered by the Applicant by raising quarterly invoices on the ULBs. After the Greenfield Public Street Lighting System has been commissioned, the Applicant is required to undertake the Operation and Maintenance of the system till the end of the term of the Agreement.

The Applicant submited that 90 per cent of Project Capital Expenditure received as capital subsidy is not “consideration” as defined in Section 2(31) of the CGST Act. Under Paragraph 13.1(a) ) of the Agreement, both the Authority and the ULBs have jointly agreed to provide the Applicant with the consideration, being 90% of the total capital expenditure incurred for the project. As per Para 1.3 of Escrow Agreement, the ultimate responsibility for depositing the Capital Subsidy in Escrow Account shall be with the Authority (Odisha Government). Hence Odisha Government is responsible for depositing Capital Subsidy equal to 90 per cent of amount received by the Applicant.

The Applicant submitted that they are not liable to pay GST on capital subsidy (90 % of the total capital expenditure ) amount received in terms of SIOM Agreement and Escrow Agreement as per the discussion held with the authority which awarded the work.

It was also submitted that the applicant has fulfilled all the conditions of works contract service (WCSs). Therefore, the supply made by the applicant qualifies as a supply of works contract services. Further, it was submitted that the Greenfield Street Lighting System along with the Centralized Control & Monitoring System is an immovable property. In the present case, the streetlight poles, with the overreach arms, LED Luminaires, feeder panels, etc. attached thereto, are erected along the roadways by burying the same up to 1.8 meters underground depth. The street light poles have to be attached to the earth in sucha manner that they should be capable of withstanding wind speeds of 150 km/h. Further, each pole is connected (underground) to an earthing electrode attached to every fifth pole. It is submitted that the said poles cannot be dismantled and reassembled without substantial damage to the entire paraphernalia. Thus, the Greenfield Street Lighting System qualifies as an immovable property.

The applicant has submitted that the entire contract shall be treated as a contract for the composite supply of works contract involving a supply of goods and services. In support of its claim, the applicant cited the decision of (i) Super Wealth Financial Enterprises (P) Ltd. reported in 2019 (20) GSTL 505 (AAR-GST).

Some of the Discussion & Findings

  • We find that the questions before us essentially pertain to classification of supply of goods/services and the rate of GST applicable on supply of such goods/service, particularly the applicability of concessional rate of tax in terms of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017. We, therefore observe that the issue before us is squarely covered under Section 97(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore we admit the application for consideration.
  • It has been argued by the applicant, through the written submission and also at the time of personal hearing, that the impugned supply is a supply of ‘works contract service’ which is being supplied to Government of Odisha represented by the Directorate of Municipal Administration’ and the “Urban Local Bodies’. It has also been argued that Capital Subsidy (90% of Project Capital Expenditure) received as per SIOM Agreement and Escrow Agreement from Odisha Government/ULBs for executing the Green Field Public Street Lighting System is not liable to GST. Further, the applicant submitted that 10% of the Project Capital Expenditure would merit entitlement for concessional rate of GST@ 12% [CGST 6% + SGST @ 6%] in terms of Serial Number 3(vi) of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017 (as amended).
  • We find that the questions before us to answer are (a) Whether Capital Subsidy (90% of Project Capital Expenditure) received by the Applicant for execution of the Green Field Public Street Lighting System is liable to GST or not, if liable to GST, then at what rate of GST? (6) What shall be the applicable rate of GST for the balance 10% of the Project Capital Expenditure and 0&M Fees received as Annuity Fee (c) What shall be the time for raising GST Invoices for Capital Subsidy and Annuity Fee and (d) what would be the the rate of GST on the supplies by the sub-contractor to the Applicant in the instant case.
  • Before proceeding to answer the aforesaid questions, it is essential for us to examine whether in the present case, the supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant would qualify to be a supply of ‘composite supply ‘or works contract’. Therefore, we need to discuss all the provisions relating to composite supply’ and ‘works contract’ under GST Act.
  • On perusal of the SIOM agreement (supply, installation, operation and maintenance) & Equipment Price Schedule for Cluster C, we see that the contract value for cluster C( urban Local Bodies in Balasore, Bhadrak, Jajpur, Baripada) is Rs. 42.35cr and the contract pricing is different for Equipment of Materials and O&M Fee (operation and maintenance fee). Out of Rs.42.35 cr, the price of Equipments is Rs.38.23 Cr and the price for 0&M Fee is Rs.4.12Cr only. Thus the contract price has clearly bifurcated the contract into a supply of goods and supply of services. Further clause No. 13 of the agreement deals with TERMS OF PAYMENTS. The said clause of the agreement envisages that separate payment for capital subsidy & 0&M Fee. There appears to be a clear bifurcation in the agreement with respect to price of Equipments and O&M Fees.

The Question and Ruling as follows :

Question 1 : Whether Capital Subsidy (90 per cent of Project Capital Expenditure) received by the Applicant as per SIOM Agreement and Escrow Agreement from Odisha Government / ULBs for the Green Field Public Street Lighting System in the State of Odisha is not liable to GST and if liable to GST, then at what rate of GST?

Answer : Capital Subsidy (90 per cent of Project Capital Expenditure) received by the Applicant is liable to GST. The GST will have to be paid on the goods at the appropriate rate after classification under the appropriate heading.

Question 2 : What shall be the GST rate for the balance 10% of Expenditure the Project Capital and O&M Fees received as Annuity Fee over the period of 7 years by the Applicant as per SIOM Agreement considering the SI. No. 3(vi) of the notification No. 11/2017 Central Tax (Rate), dt. 28-06-2017 as amended by Notification No. 31/2017 Central Tax (Rate), dt. 13-10-2017 and corresponding notifications of Odisha State Tax Rate as amended.

Answer : The supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant would qualify to be a supply of ‘composite supply’ in terms of definition under Section 2(119) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, where the principal supply is ‘ supply of goods’ not supply of service’. Therefore, question of the applicability of concessional rate of tax in terms of Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate), dated 28-6-2017 and as amended does not arise. The GST will have to be paid on the goods at the appropriate rate after classification under the appropriate heading.

Question 3 : What shall be the time for raising GST Invoices for Capital Subsidy and Annuity Fee (consisting of 10% of Project Capital Expenditure and O&M Fee) payable in 7 years?

Answer : Since in the subject case there is a ‘composite supply’ where the predominant supply/principal supply is ‘supply of goods’, we are of the opinion that the applicant should raise invoice as per the provisions of Section 31 of the CGST Act, 2017.

Question 4 : Whether the rate of tax on the supplies by the sub-contractor to the Applicant shall be 12 % GST ( 6% CGST and 6 % SGST) in terms of serial no. 3 (ix) of Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax(Rate) dated 28.6.2017 as amended by Notification No.1/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25.01.2018/ Odisha State Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 as amended.

Answer : Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax(Rate) dated 28.6.2017 as amended is applicable for ‘supply of service’. In the instant case, the supply being undertaken or proposed to be undertaken by the applicant would qualify to be a supply of “composite supply’ in terms of definition under Section 2(119) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, where the principal supply is supply of goods’ not supply of service’. Therefore, the said notification is not applicable to the applicant.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/37PYpGP

Are you following the right budgeting model?

Are you following the right budgeting model?

A One-size-fits-all is an occasional solution in business and certainly for budgeting. Drafting a budget requires goal, vision & strategy aligned with organization mission. Organizations build a budget to set an expectation regarding future revenue & margin, which in turn becomes performance indicators for the operations head and also to take sensible strategic decisions, to strive in a competitive environment. However, amongst varied budgeting models, an organization has to choose the most effective and visionary model, keeping in consideration the environment in which a certain organization operates.

Below are four budgetary models which are widely used by organizations as per their requirement.

Incremental Budgeting:

The Incremental budgeting model is one of the easiest and traditional methods of budgeting. It adjusts the existing run-rate by increments to show the growth or decline of the business. For Example, you may increase/ decrease from last year actual revenue basis past trends and will reach out to budget. However, such a budget is likely to result in budgetary slack, wherein, managers may not provide correct insights into operations. It also excludes external drivers, such as high inflation or pandemic scenario etc.

Zero-Based Budgeting:

Zero-Based Budgeting calls for line-by-line justification of revenue and purchases. Also, zero-based budgeting is used to economize & trim the cost budget for excess spending. If compared, incremental budgeting increases or decreases across the board, however, zero-based budgeting assumes that each department starts at zero. Each department needs to justify each spending and building a budget from the scratch.

Zero-based budgeting is the best method to eliminate extra spending, but an exhaustive process at the same time. Complete visibility in budgets provides conscious spending and saving. Zero-based budgeting is most effective for savings goals.

Value Proposition Budgeting:

Value proposition budgeting focusses that everything in the budget delivers value for all the stakeholders of the business, i.e. Customer, staff, investors. Value proposition budgeting focusses on avoiding unnecessary expenditures, however, expenditure is not precisely aimed like zero-based budgeting goals. Budgets are itemized and thereafter justified to prove value for the business, eliminating cost that does not bring value and maximizing the budget to deliver strong results. Value proposition budgeting can also be used in alignment with other budgetary models, such as activity-based budgeting, on a small or large scale. However, value proposition budgeting sometimes becomes difficult to quantify as the value offered by multiple departments or initiatives can change rapidly.

Activity-based budgeting:

The activity-based budgeting method is a top-down budgeting approach and the mentioned model is focused on the result an organization wishes to achieve. For example, if an organization is seeking valuation or is targeted to achieve a turnover of XXX million, the budget would be computed backwards to analyze the activities which will create that desired effect and will proceed accordingly.

Activity-based budgeting is enormously effective when an organization has goal-oriented strategy.

There are other budgeting models as well like rolling budget, flexible budget etc. which aren’t commonly used but few organization use as per its industry & market conditions to achieve its mission.

Feel free to reach the author at priyankamaheshwari38@gmail.com.



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/2ZTZIAg

Representation on various issues relating to VAT/ GST

Representation on various issues relating to VAT/ GST

SALES TAX BAR ASSOCIATION (REGO.)

Ref. No. STBA/2021/13                                                             Dated : February 16, 2021

The Commissioner,
Value Added Tax,
Department of Trade & Taxes,
I.P. Estate, New Delhi.

Subject : Representation/ Reminder on various issues relating to VAT/ GST discussed with your goodself.

Sir,

This is with reference to various issues discussed with your goodself in the meeting of Newly elected Office Bearers and Executive Committee Members of Sales Tax Bar Association (Regd.) in your Chamber on Monday, 8th Feb., 2021:

In continuation, we respectfully reiterate following issues for your immediate consideration:

1. Fixation of exclusive working hours by OHAs for hearing of the objection petitions in morning sessions only:

(i) THAT it pains us to point out that several objections (huge No.) are pending before Objection Hearing Authorities for want of hearings. The Objection Hearing Authorities are always stated to be busy with other worll­ and they do not have any time to hear the Objection petitions.

(ii) THAT all the objection authorities have fixed different hours for hearind the objection petitions but it is sad to say that even in those hours, th objections are not taken up. The past practice of the Department has been to hear the objections petitions during morning hours and units (for disposal of petitions) were fixed by the Department to get appropriate disposal of practice has been dispensed with and the matter has been worse during pandemic era. Hardly any objection petitions have been disposed off except SOHA Branch.

(iii) THAT in view of the above, we humbly request you to direct the I Objection Hearing Authorities to fix hearings of the objection petitions in the morning hours. Earlier, it used to be from 11 O’clock to 1.30 p.m. At the same time, units (no. of disposals) should be fixed for disposal of objections petitions. Earlier it was mandatory to dispose off minimum fixed No. of petitibns in a month. This will result in disposal of the objection petitions which are pending since 2007-2008. Needless to say that disposal of objections is also in the interest of Department as the Department gets due tax imposed if the objection is rejected.

(iv) In addition, time limit (say maximum 15 days) be fixed to pass orders in the matters heard and kept for orders. In case an OHA is transferred in between, he should be directed to pass orders’ in already heard matters. There are many instances in which OHAs has heard the matters 2 months earlier but have not passed orders for the reasons best known to them.

2. Appointment of SOHAs:

At present only two SOHAs are working for disposal of objections relating to statutory forms under the Central Sales Tax Act. In view of large number of such objections pending for disposal and now more objections likely to come very soon due to many orders being passed by many officers of Department for F.Y. 2016-17, the Two SOHAs will not suffice.

We accordingly humbly request for immediate appointment of at least six more officers (SOHA) so that objections can be cleared. We are submitting it on the basis of our experience in earlier years.

3. Functioning of Authority for Advance Ruling under GST:

Since Nov., 2020, AAR is not functioning and orders for many cases which have been heard and kept for orders are also pending. We were informed that Central Authority has already been appointed and new Authority will start functioning in 7 – 8 days. We hope you will look into ,it at your personal level and have the Authority start working.

4. Review/ Rectification of orders:

Under Section 74B, there is a provision for Review of orders passed by Ld. AA within 30 days of the order and for rectification within 4 years from the date of order whenever mistake is apparent on record. However, whenever our members approach the Ld. Officers of the Department for rectification, they refuse to accept the application saying that 30 days times is over and now you should file objection before SOHA / OHA ignoring the legal position.

We request you to please inform them the legal positions to accept the rectification as per law and dispose the same within fixed time so to avoid harassment of members / dealers.

5. Re-opening of VAT Portal for filing revised returns under DVAT Act & CST Act for F.Y. 2018-19

(i) THAT under the provisions of Delhi Value Added Tax Act and Central Sales Tax Act, the dealer is allowed to revise his prescribed returns withi next financial year. That means the returns for the financial year 2018-19 could have been revised by 31.03.2020.

(ii) THAT with the onslaught of pandemic COVID-19 on 22.03.2020, lockdown was announced and everything became standstill. The returns which are required to be revised by 31.03.2020 could not be revised by the dealers.

(iii) THAT after the un-lockdown, it was found that the software in the portal accepting revised returns has been closed.

(iv) THAT we have been representing since then that the portal should be opened and the dealers should be allowed to revise their returns for the financial year 2018-19. Somehow, the portal has not been opened till date. The representations were made to your predecessors and a copy of the same is annexed for your ready perusal. It is self explanatory.

6. Assessment under CST Act, 1956 for A.Y. 2016-17 after removal of glitches in software system:

(i) THAT Central assessments for the assessment year 2016-17 are being finalized through computer software keeping in view time barring mandate.

(ii) THAT the central assessments are finalized on the basis of Central Form 9 filed in support of concessional rate of tax declared inter-State sales. The dealers are required to furnish Form ‘C’ in support of such claims and there are other Forms also being ‘H, I’ etc. which are required to be filed for claiming exemptions etc. THAT the portal stopped accepting Form 9 for quite some time. On representation of the Bar, the portal was opened and the dealers were allowed to file Form 9. In some cases, part of the statutory Forms were filed before the Form 9 was blocked and in other cases, Forms were filed after the re-opening of the portal allowing dealers to file Form 9.

(iv) THAT it has been noticed that the portal allows concession / exemption on the Forms filed before the closure of the portal. All Forms filed after re­opening of the portal are not considered while finalising the assessment. This is resulting in unwarranted anxiety and tension to the dealers / professionals at large.

You are requested to direct the concerned authorities to look into this glitch and have it removed so that on the one hand, undue tension is not caused to the dealers and on the other hand, Department is also saved fro undue litigation.

7. Disposal of review application / requests for sou-moto review filed b dealers for the year 2015-16

(i) THAT the limitation for finalising assessments for the year 2015-16 was to expire on 31.03.2020. The pandemic COVID-19 broke on 22.03.2020 in Delhi. The Assessing Authorities fearing loss of revenue because of non­finalizing of assessments, mechanically framed the assessments for the year 2015-16.

(ii) THAT these assessments were finalised even in cases where FORM 9 under the Central Tax Act stood filed. We take this opportunity to place on record that Central Sales Tax (Delhi) Rules were amended to provide that the assessments would’ be finalized on the basis of FORM-9. It was a conscious decision at that time that for finalisation of Central assessments, dealers would not be called and the details of statutory forms available with them would be uploaded by them in FORM 9 on the VAT portal and the assessing authorities would finalize assessments on that basis.

(iii) THAT after the finalization of Central assessments for the year 2015-16 ignoring FORM 9 which stood filed and in large number of cases, the assessments were finalized where the assessments had already been framed. One Assessing Authority finalized the assessments on quarterly basis and during this pandemic scare, the subsequent assessments were finalized on annual basis. The crux of the matter is that for the same period, two assessments were framed.

(iv) THAT it was then decided by the Department that wherever two assessments have been framed or the assessment has been framed ignoring FORM 9, all those matters would be reviewed. The dealers in some cases filed applications for review and in other cases requested the assessing authorities to suo-motu review the orders.

(v) THAT it is a matter of record that the limitation for filing the review applications as well as request for suo motu review is still continuing in view of the orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Court on its own Motion Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020.

(vi) THAT probably because of non-conversant with the orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Assessing Authorities have not taken up the review/suo motu review petitions thinking that these are time barred. A circular was also issued by the Department to say that limitations would be governed keeping in view the Supreme Court orders. This Circular, it appears has not reached assessing authorities (Circular No.3 of 2020-21).

(vii) THAT a representation was made to the then Commissioner but the necessary directions have not been passed on to the Assessing Authorities.

8. Unauthorised Data Operators working in different Wards:

It is informed that in almost all Wards unauthorised data operators are being used by Officers of the Wards. Theses operators many times misbehave with members of the Bar and the dealer as well. The presence of such data operators is highly objectionable and secrecy of the data is made available to outsiders.

9. Data not available in system of Department for framing re-assessment in remand matters for F.Y. 2008-09 and earlier period:

It is informed that data for the year 2008-09 and earlier is not available in computer system of the Department to frame remanded assessment in the cases remand by OHA. In absence of same, AA cannot pass the remand orders and due refund cannot be issued to the dealer. This being a system glitch, necessary instructions be issued to system branch to do the needful at the earliest possible.

10. Generation of refunds where bank particulars have changed:

It is informed that in many cases bank particulars of dealers have changed with the passage of time. Refund orders due in such cases cannot be generated as particulars cannot be changed in DP-1. The same has been closed and now amendment is not possible otherwise.

We, therefore, request that necessary instructions be issued to open DP-1 or any alternative arrangement be made to accept change in bank particulars for issue of old refunds.

11. Notices u/s 59(2) for assessments under Central Act:

(i) It has been seen that Ward Officers are issuing notices u/s 59(2) for Central Assessment for 2016-17 even if all “C” Forms have been uploaded in Form -9. We therefore, request you to please direct the officers not to issue notices in such cases as it increases their work as well as work of the dealer and the Counsel which is a wastage of time and energy.

(ii) Ward Officer should also be directed to issue notices u/s 59(2) in those cases where full statutory forms are not submitted in Form-9 by the dealer before completing the assessment based on Form-9.

12. Notices for intimating discrepancies in returns after scrutiny (GST)

It is informed that State GST Authorities are issuing GST ASMT-10 intimating discrepancies in the returns based on difference between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B for 2018-19 even if differences of tax is of few paise.

This type of notices unnecessarily increases work of department, and of th dealer and the consultant without any revenue earning to the Govt. (copy of one such notice enclosed).

It is, therefore, requested to direct the officers to be careful while issuing such notices as it gives bad name to the department and the officer concerned.

13. Name Plates for Officers:

It is reiterated that inspite of previous instructions name plates have not been fixed at the office prernises of Ward Officers and consequently members are not aware before whom they are appearing. It is therefore, suggested that the same be placed as early as possible.

Hope to receive your magnanimous consideration

With regards

Yours truly,

For Sales Tax Bar Association (Regd.)

Suresh Agrawal
Secretary



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3kxRuY4

Thursday, February 25, 2021

CBIC Clarification on Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess (AIDC) payment by EOU

CBIC Clarification on Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess (AIDC) payment by EOU

Circular No. 07/2021-Customs

F.No. DGEP/SEZ/09/2017 (Part III)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs
(Directorate General of Export Promotion)
******

New Delhi, dated 22 February, 2021

To,

All Pr. Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners of Customs/ Customs (Prev.),
All Pr. Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners of Central Tax/ Central Excise,
All Pr. Commissioners/ Commissioners of Customs/ Customs (Prev.),
All Pr. Commissioners/ Commissioners of Central Tax and Central Excise,
All Pr. Director Generals/Director Generals under CBIC.

Madam/Sir,

Subject: Clarification regarding payment of Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess (AIDC) by EOU under various situations and amendment to Circular no. 35/2016-Customs dated 29.07.2020 – regarding.

Finance Bill, 2021 (15 of 2021) dated 01.02.2021, vide clause 115 has imposed a duty of customs, to be called Agriculture Infrastructure and Development Cess (AIDC), on the import of goods specified in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 at the rate not exceeding the rate of customs duty as specified in the said Schedule, for the purposes of financing the agriculture infrastructure and other development expenditure. The said provision of clause 115 of the Bill has been given immediate effect under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931.

1.1 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) read with clause 115 of the said bill, Government of India vide Notification No. 11/2021- Customs dated 1st February, 2021 vide Sr. no. 19 read with serial no. 7 of the Annexure to the said notification has fully exempted goods imported by EOUs/EHTP units/STP units (collectively called EOUs) from the AIDC as the goods imported by these units enjoy benefit of exemption from basic customs duty under notification no. 52/2003-Cus dated 31.03.2003.

1.2 In case of EOU selling finished goods in DTA, BCD exempted on import of inputs used in such finished goods is to be paid vide Notification No. 59/2017-Customs dated 30.06.2017 [amending by Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003]. On payment of such BCD by EOU at the time of clearance of finished goods it is treated as if no exemption of BCD was allowed to the EOU under Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003. Once it is deemed that no exemption of BCD on inputs is allowed which were imported under exemption Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003, AIDC exemption under Notification no. 11/2021-Customs dated 01.2.2021 also gets denied on such inputs and same is also required to be paid by EOU.

1.3 In addition to clearance of goods in DTA there are many situations like clearance of inputs; capital goods; packing material suitable for repeated use such empty cones, bobbins, containers; left over textile fabric or textile material etc. or exit from EOU scheme. In such cases duty/tax of which exemption under Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003 was availed at the time of import is required to be paid at the time of clearance. In case of clearance of capital goods, applicable depreciation is allowed for denial of exemption. Unutilized left over textile fabric or textile material is allowed to be cleared into DTA on payment of duty leviable at the time of import but for the exemption on transaction value as if the goods have been manufactured in that unit. Exemption of duty/tax on goods imported under Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003 is also denied on account of breach of various conditions of EOU scheme. Once EOU is required to pay back BCD for which exemption was claimed and allowed under Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003 at the time of import then exemption of AIDC, if availed, in all such situations shall also be denied. Thus, EOU shall be required to pay AIDC in the manner of payment of BCD against the goods imported under exemption Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003 under various situations.

2. EOU/STP/EHTP are required to maintain and also submit digital copy of Form – A to Circular no. 35/2016-Customs dated 29.07.2016, by 10th of month to proper officer, which captures the summary of receipt, removal, returns and balance of imported goods under Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003. Copy of Quarterly Performance Report and Annual Performance Reports [QPR/APR] are also required to be submitted to jurisdictional AC/DC of Customs as mandated by DGFT Public Notice no. 36/2015-2020 dated 04.09.218. Though QPR/APR contain details of various activities including revenue contribution by EOUs but these are reflected in consolidated manner and these reports may be a monitoring tool for departmental officers with limitations. However, for effective and monthly monitoring of exemption of duty/taxes availed under Notification No. 52/2003-Customs dated 31.03.2003, the said Form ‘A’ is amended and revised Form ‘A’ is annexed herewith. Circular no. 35/2016-Customs dated 29.07.2016 may be treated as amended to above extent.

3. Difficulties, if any, may be brought to the notice of Board.

4. Hindi version will follow.

Encl: – Revised Form ‘A’

Yours faithfully,

-S/d-

(Saroj Kumar Behera)
Additional Director



from Studycafe https://ift.tt/3bB43xK