Income Tax Law Updates
Notification/Circulars:
Notification No. 16/2022 / F. No. 370142/35/2020-TPL-Part-II dated 28-03-2022
The CBDT has extended the date of passing of any order under section 26(3) of the Benami Act to 30-09-2022. The extension has been given in those cases where the due date to pass the order falls between 20-03-2020 to 30-06-2021.
Notification No. 21/2022] [F.No. 370142/8/2022-TPL dated 30-03-2022
Income Tax Forms for AY 2022-23 [SAHAJ ITR-1, ITR-2, ITR-3, SUGAM ITR4, ITR-5, ITR-6, ITR-V and ITR- Ack]
Notification No. 22/2022/F. No.178/27/2017-ITA-I dated 31-03-2022
In terms of clause (47) of section 10 of Income-tax Act, 1961, the Central Government notified the infrastructure debt fund namely, the ‘the Kotak Infrastructure Debt Fund Limited (PAN : AAACK5920G)’ for the purposes of the said clause, for the assessment year 2018-19 and subsequent years.
CBDT Circular No.7 of 2022 dated 30-03-2022
Clarification with respect to relaxation of provisions of rule 114AAA of Income-tax Rules, 1962 prescribing the manner of making Permanent Account Number (PAN) inoperative.
Notification No. 18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL(Part1] dated 29-03-2022
e-Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022.
Notification No. 19/2022/F. No. 370142/15/2022-TPL] dated 30-03-2022
Faceless Inquiry or Valuation Scheme, 2022.
Every person who, in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 139AA, is required to intimate his Aadhaar number to the prescribed authority in the prescribed form and manner, fails to do so by the date referred to in the said sub-section, shall, at the time of subsequent intimation of his Aadhaar number to the prescribed authority, be liable to pay, by way of fee, an amount equal to, — (a) five hundred rupees, in a case where such intimation is made within three months from the date referred to in sub-section (2) of section 139AA; and (b) one thousand rupees, in all other cases.”.
The Government of India in IEBR for FY 2022-23 have not mandated NHAI to raise funds from the market. Therefore, NHAI shall not issue 54 EC Bonds and any other debt instruments/Bonds etc. w.e.f. 01.04.2022.
Case Laws/Judgements:
This Court also finds that there is not even a whisper as to which limb of Section 270A of the Act is attracted and how the ingredient of sub-section (9) of Section 270A is satisfied. In the absence of such particulars, the mere reference to the word “misreporting” by the Respondents in the assessment order to deny immunity from imposition of penalty and prosecution makes the impugned order manifestly arbitrary.
The Hon’ble ITAT held that there is no finding of the AO based on some contradictory evidence to disapprove that explanation offered by the assessee was false or the assessee was not able to substantiate the explanation furnished or fails to prove that such explanation is not bona fide and that all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income has not been disclosed by him. Therefore the order on the CIT(A) is accordingly set aside and thus penalty u/s 271(1)(c) levied by the AO is not in accordance with law therefore same is cancelled. In the result appeal of assessee is allowed.
The Hon’ble ITAT held that the Bench is of considered opinion that a presumption of truth is attached to the record of proceedings conducted by public authorities as reflected in their orders though the same is rebuttal. The assessee had the opportunity to rebut the findings of Ld. Assessing officer with regard to denial of the parties, who allegedly had issued bills. However, the assessee by his non-appearance failed to rebut the observations and findings of the AO by any evidence, before the Ld. First Appellate Authority. Rather non-appearance gives rise to presumption that assessee had nothing to rebut to the findings of the Ld. Assessing Officer. That being so there is no merit in the appeal. The same is dismissed.
Goods and Services Tax Law Updates:
AAR/Case Laws/Judgements
In re Data Processing Forms Pvt. Ltd. (GST AAR Gujarat) Advance Ruling dated 14-03-2022
That the Supply of services provided to State educational boards by way of services relating to conduct of examination by State Educational Boards is exempt vide entry 66(b) (iv) of said Notification 12/2017-CT( R), as clarified at clause 3(iv) to the Explanation of the said Notification.
E-Logistics And Anr. Vs UOI (Guwahati High Court) Dated 23/03/2022
The Hon’ble High Court held that a reading of the demand notice goes to show that the objection raised by the petitioners that for the contract work for which the service tax has been imposed they are exempted from payment of such tax had not been conclusively determined by the authorities. The authorities on the other hand appears to have gone on a presumption that as because the materials produced by the petitioner did not make it discernible for the authorities to arrive at such conclusion, therefore, the authorities were of the view that the petitioner is liable to pay the tax.
The liability to pay a service tax is not upon a presumption nor can it be based upon a state of indeterminateness on the part of the authorities. The liability to pay a tax has to be conclusively determined that for the given transaction for which the tax is imposed the noticee is liable to pay such tax and such taxes are not being paid.
SSG Furnishing LLP Vs Assistant Commissioner, CGST (Delhi High Court) Dated 24-03-2022
Since the petitioner’s registration has been lying suspended for more than forty days on the basis of a show cause notice which is bereft of any reason or fact, this Court stays the impugned notice dated 14th February, 2022 and directs forthwith restoration of the GST Registration of the petitioner.
In re Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Board (GST AAR Telangana) dated 29/03/2022
The hon’ble AAR pronounced the ruling that the clause (d) of sub section 2 of Section 15 clearly states that the value of supply shall include interest or late fee or penalty for delayed payment of any consideration for any supply. Therefore all the monies paid to the contractor by the applicant including the interest on delayed payments is liable to tax under CGST Act, 2017 under this provision.
Hon’ble HC deletes penalty under GST as there was no intention to evade tax. It is held in order that there is only a technical breach committed by the petitioner and there is no intention to evade tax, I am inclined to quash the impugned order and allow this writ petition by directing the respondent to release the vehicle and the consignment to the petitioner, if the same has not been released already.
Updates from Other Laws:
AAR/Case Laws/Judgements
Remand Order Cannot Be Passed As A Matter of course: The Division Bench, without assigning any cogent reasons, has set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and has remanded the matter to the Land Tribunal. It is settled law that the order of remand cannot be passed as a matter of course. An order of remand cannot also be passed for the mere purpose of remanding a proceeding to the lower court or the Tribunal. An endeavour has to be made by the Appellate Court to dispose of the case on merits. Where both the sides have led oral and documentary evidence, the Appellate Court has to decide the appeal on merits instead of remanding the case to the lower court or the Tribunal. We are of the view that, in the instant case, the Division Bench has remanded the matter without any justification.
![Weekly Newsletter Income Tax, GST and Other Law [4th Week, July 2022]](http://taxindiaupdates.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Untitled-120x120.png)
