{"id":703,"date":"2015-12-17T09:30:09","date_gmt":"2015-12-17T09:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/?p=703"},"modified":"2021-07-14T12:32:06","modified_gmt":"2021-07-14T12:32:06","slug":"corporate-professional-update-december-11-2015","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/corporate-professional-update-december-11-2015\/","title":{"rendered":"CORPORATE & PROFESSIONAL UPDATE DECEMBER 11, 2015"},"content":{"rendered":"

Corporate & Professional Update December 11, 2015<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n
\"www.caindelhiindia.com;<\/a>
www.caindelhiindia.com; corporate updates<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

INCOME TAX ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

SECTION 2(1A)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

AGRICULTURAL INCOME<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Income from coffee business:<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Where assessee was selling only sun dried coffee seeds and was not engaged in other processing activities, its income from coffee estate had to be computed by applying Rule 7B –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0175 (Chennai \u2013 Trib.)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 2(15)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

CHARITABLE PURPOSE<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Education: <\/strong><\/span>SLP granted against High Court’s ruling that where assessee-trust generated income by giving hall and premises of its educational institution on rentals and said income was used for the educational institution itself, such income could not be brought to tax – [2015]\u00a0326 (SC)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 10A<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

FREE TRADE ZONE<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Reassessment<\/strong>:<\/span>\u00a0Where Assessing Officer issued notice for reassessment on ground that excessive deduction was taken by assessee under section 10A and said action was not confirmed by Tribunal, since revenue did not file appeal against order of Tribunal and still revenue had time to file an appeal, reassessment proceedings could not be sustained till filing of an appeal –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0200 (Delhi)<\/p>\n

SECTION 13<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST – DENIAL OF EXEMPTION<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Sub-section (1)(d) :\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>SLP dismissed against High Court’s ruling that in case of a trust registered under section 12AA, only such part of income which is violative of section 13(1)(d) can be brought to tax at maximum marginal rate and entirety of income cannot be denied exemption under section 11 –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0324(SC)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 32<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

DEPRECIATION – ALLOWABILITY OF<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Trust :<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>SLP granted against High Court’s ruling that where assessee-trust acquired assets from income of trust and claimed deduction on account of application of income, depreciation claimed on user of these assets would be a permissible deduction –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0326(SC)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 40(a)(ia)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

BUSINESS DISALLOWANCE – CONTRACTOR OR SUB-CONTRACTOR<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Conditions precedent:<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Only an amount outstanding at end of close of assessment year can be disallowed under section 40(a) (ia) –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0288 (Chennai \u2013Trib)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/em>SECTION 44<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

INSURANCE BUSINESS<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Reassessment :<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Where in case of assessee carrying on general insurance business, assessment order was passed accepting assessee’s claim that in view of omission of clause (b) of rule 5 of First Schedule of Income-tax Act w.e.f. 1-4-1989, profit from sale of investment was exempt from tax, Assessing Officer subsequently could not reopen assessment merely on basis of change of opinion that aforesaid income was liable to tax –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0171 (Delhi)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 92C<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

TRANSFER PRICING – COMPUTATION OF ARMS LENGTH PRICE<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Comparable and adjustments\/Adjustment – AMP expenditure :<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Where details of advertising, marketing and promotion functions performed by assessee were not available on record and functions of comparables had also not been analyzed by TPO and he applied bright line test for determining value of International transaction, matter be reconsidered afresh –\u00a0[2015] 63\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0367 (Delhi \u2013 Trib.)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 220<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

COLLECTION AND RECOVERY OF TAX – WHEN TAX PAYABLE AND WHEN ASSESSEE DEEMED DEFAULT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Computation of interest :<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Where pursuant to High Court’s order, impugned order passed by Tribunal granting refund to assessee was set aside and demand of tax was restored, assessee was liable to pay interest under section 220(2) on unpaid tax liability from date of original order to order passed by Assessing Officer giving effect to order of High Court –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0365 (Bangalore \u2013 Trib.)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 271AAA<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

PENALTY – WHERE SEARCH HAS BEEN INITIATED<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Scope of :<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Provisions of sections 271AAA and 271(1)(c) are mutually exclusive and, thus, once penalty is initiated under section 271AAA for ‘specified previous year’, there cannot be any occasion to impose penalty under section 271(1)(c) –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0363 (Ahmedabad \u2013 Trib.)<\/em><\/p>\n

COMPETITION ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

SECTION 4<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

PROHIBITION OF ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Where findings recorded by Supreme Court clearly established that respondent Nos. 3 to 5 had formed a cartel for procuring contract of liaisoning work for procurement of Coal for state power generation company, cancellation of contract awarded to lowest bidder would make a prima facie case warranting an investigation into matter –\u00a0[2015] 63\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0368 (CAT)<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0SARFAESI ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

SECTION 14<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE OR DISTRICT MAGISTRATE TO ASSIST SECURED CREDITOR IN TAKING POSSESSION OF SECURED ASSET<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Order passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under section 14, appointing Court Commissioner to take possession of secured assets could not be faulted as in absence of any registered agreement of tenancy being placed on record, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had no knowledge of any valid and lawful tenancy in favour of petitioners with respect to said assets and equally Bank could not be said to be guilty of suppression for not having made a declaration on that behalf –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0361 (Bombay)<\/em><\/p>\n

SERVICE TAX<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

SECTION 65(19)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

TAXABLE SERVICES – BUSINESS AUXILIARY SERVICES<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Cutting of trees and converting ‘cutwood’ into ‘billets’ for use in ‘pulp plant’ amounts to ‘processing of goods’ and if said activity does not amount to manufacture under Central Excise laws, it would be liable to service tax under Business Auxiliary Services –\u00a0[2015] 63\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0319 (Bangalore \u2013 CESTAT)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 65(68)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

TAXABLE SERVICES – MANPOWER RECRUITMENT OR SUPPLY AGENCY’S SERVICES<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Work of welding, and gas cutting on various locations of service recipient cannot be regarded as ‘manpower supply service’, as it involves execution of work, not merely supply of manpower –\u00a0[2015]\u00a06 (Mumbai \u2013 CESTAT)<\/em><\/p>\n

SECTION 93<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

EXEMPTIONS – SERVICE TAX – REFUND OF TAX PAID ON SERVICES USED FOR EXPORT GOODS<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

A refund claim of service tax filed beyond time-limit specified in concerned exemption notification is time-barred and not maintainable, even if same is within time-limit specified in section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 –[2015]\u00a010 (New Delhi \u2013 CESTAT)<\/em><\/p>\n

CENTRAL EXCISE ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

SECTION 11AA<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

INTEREST – ON DELAYED PAYMENT OF DUTY\/TAX<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Even in case of retrospective amendment barring use of credit of AED(GSI) accrued prior to 1-4-2000 for payment of BED, interest on credit used in contravention of said bar would be payable from date of wrong utilization, not from date of such retrospective amendment –\u00a0[2015] 63\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0315 (Punjab & Haryana)<\/em><\/p>\n

CUSTOMS ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

SECTION 111<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

CONFISCATION – SMUGGLING\/ILLEGAL IMPORT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Where importer declared country of origin as USA as per supplier’s declarations, importer’s assessment cannot be reopened alleging misdeclaration on ground that goods bore Australia marking, especially when department had not raised such objection at time of import –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0356 (SC)<\/em><\/p>\n

CENVAT CREDIT RULES<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

RULE 5<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

CENVAT CREDIT – REFUND OF<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

In case of refund claim filed under rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, read with Notification 17\/2009-ST, ‘date of filing of refund claim’ would be ‘date on which refund claim in filed with department in proper form’ and not ‘date on which documents called for by Department, are furnished’ –\u00a0[2015]\u00a09 (New Delhi \u2013 CESTAT)<\/em><\/p>\n

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances; Hope the information will assist you in your Professional\u00a0endeavors. For query or help, contact:\u00a0info@caindelhiindia.com<\/a>\u00a0or call at\u00a0011-233 433 33<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Corporate & Professional Update December 11, 2015 INCOME TAX ACT SECTION 2(1A) AGRICULTURAL INCOME Income from coffee business:\u00a0Where assessee was selling only sun dried coffee seeds and was not engaged in other processing activities, its income from coffee estate had to be computed by applying Rule 7B –\u00a0[2015]\u00a0175 (Chennai \u2013 Trib.) SECTION 2(15) CHARITABLE PURPOSE …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[647,142,146],"tags":[566,502,501,569,572,179,180,214,181,562,560,538],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/703"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=703"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/703\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3131,"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/703\/revisions\/3131"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=703"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=703"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=703"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}