Income Tax Law Updates

Notification/Circular:

CBDT Notification No. 49/2022/F.No.370142/6/2022-TPL dated 05-05-2022

CBDT vide above Notification amended rule  Rule 44E of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 related to Application for obtaining an Advance Ruling and introduces new FORM No. 34C , 34D, 34DA, 34E and 34EA.

Case Laws/Judgement:

M/s SLV Housing Development Corporation Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Date of Order 19-04-2022 

Hon’ble ITAT held that the claim of the expenditure by the assessee is bona fide (claim due to wrong Advice by CA) and accordingly, set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) for the year under consideration.

In re Cosmic Ferro Alloys Limited (GST AAR West Bengal) Date of Order 22-04-2022

GST Payable on transfer of business if transfer is not as going concern: In the instant case, admittedly the applicant has entered into an agreement which inter alia involves transfer of goods forming part of the assets of the business. In a standalone manner, such transfer shall be treated as supply of goods in terms of clause (a) of Entry No. 4 of Schedule II. 

M/s Mohan Lal Santwani Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court) Date of Order 25-04-2022 

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court held that in view of the principles settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court and by High Courts in the judgments, we direct the respondents to maintain judicial discipline and follow the doctrine of binding precedent and be careful in future, having due regard to the authorities of the Court, keeping in mind the judicial propriety and discipline.

Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) Date of Order 28-04-2022

The Hon’ble ITAT held that interest expense on late deposit of VAT, service tax, TDS etc are allowable expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.


Goods and Services Tax Law Updates:

AAR/Case Laws/Judgement:

M/s Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) Date of Order 02-05-2022:

Hon’ble Bombay High Court held that Petitioners are allowed to file and correct TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Form manually, in case it is not possible to file the same online, it shall be filed manually.

Munjaal Manishbhai Bhatt Vs Union of India (Gujrat High Court) Appeal Number : Special Civil Application No. 1350 of 2021 Date of Order : 06/05/2022

The Hon’ble High Court held that Paragraph 2 of the Notification No. 11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.6.2017 and identical notification under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which provide for a mandatory fixed rate of deduction of 1/3rd of total consideration towards the value of land is ultra-vires the provisions as well as the scheme of the GST Acts. Application of such mandatory uniform rate of deduction is discriminatory, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.


Updates from Other Laws:

AAR/Case Laws/Judgement:

SEBI Circular No.: SEBI/ HO/ MRD1/ MRD1_DTCS/ P/CIR/ 2022/ 58 dated 02-05-2022

System and Network Audit of Market Infrastructure Institutions (MIIs): Taking into account the rapid technological developments in the securities market and the entailing risks that these developments pose to the efficiency and integrity of markets, SEBI vide Circular no. SEBI/HO/MRD1/ICC1/CIR/P/2020/03 dated January 07, 2020, had mandated that stock exchanges, clearing corporations and depositories should conduct an Annual System Audit by a reputed independent auditor.

Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Vs Mange Ram Sharma (Supreme Court of India) Civil Appeal No. 10535 of 2011 Date of Order 04-05-2012

Hon’ble Supreme Court directed that no doctor would be permitted to run a polyclinic or a nursing home in the garb of a clinic. Therefore, the question of keeping the patients in the clinic overnight would not arise. The purpose of permitting a clinic is strictly in accordance with the directions of this court as already issued as well as the bye-laws. The doctors will be permitted to run a clinic to provide personal service to the outdoor patients and nothing more. The doctors would be permitted to conduct professional practice, by the resident doctor alone, within the scope of the directions already issued by this court.