Income Tax Law Updates
Case Laws/Judgement:
Reji Easow Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Mumbai) Order dated 08-03-2022
Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai held that for claiming exemption under section 54 Date on which possession is by the Assessee should be taken as the date of purchase and further section only require Assessee to purchase/Construct a residential house within the specified period and source of funds is quite irrelevant.
DCIT Vs Himalayan Auto Era (India) Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) dated 11-03-2022
Hon’ble ITAT Delhi held that the transformation of the article in order to bring a new article into existence and this activity would amount to ‘manufacturing’ and be eligible for deduction u/s 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961.
Seven Jewels Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) dated 10/03/2022
Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai held that addition For unexplained expenditure cannot be made on mere presumption. Mere presumption, as the AO has not referred to any document of third-party having mention of such factors in transaction of purchase of diamonds. In view of the above findings, we find no reason to sustain the addition of Rs. 87,26,922, made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A), and least under section 69C of the Act. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
Hon’ble ITAT held that assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act by the Assessing Officer is bad in law and has to be quashed as the Assessing Officer has failed to provide the copies of statements on which he relied on for making assessments and also for not providing cross examination of those persons inspite of specific request made by the assessee. Thus, we quash the assessment orders passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on this ground.
Hon’ble ITAT Ahmedabad held that In the absence of a statutory provision the duty cannot be cast upon legal representative to intimate factum of death of assessee to department and thus, where AO issued a notice to the assessee under Section 148 of the Act after his death and in such a case it could not have been validly served upon the assessee the said notice being invalid is required to be quashed.
M/s ITO Vs ARCIL SBPS 024 I Trust (ITAT Mumbai) dated 11-03-2022
Hon’ble ITAT held that Ld. CIT(A) has dealt with the issue in detail and gave a clear finding that assessee is a revocable trust and not an AOP. In view of the provisions of section 61, 62 and 63 of the Act, it was held that income is not taxable in the hands of the assessee but the same is taxable in the hands of the contributors.
M/s 42 Hertz Software India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore) Order Dt 07/03/2022
Hon’ble ITAT held that FTC cannot be denied to the assessee. Assessee is directed to file the relevant details/evidence in support of its claim. We thus remand this issue back to the Ld. AO to consider the claim of assessee in accordance with law, based on the verification carried out in respect of the supporting documents filed by assessee. Accordingly the grounds raised by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 07th March, 2022.
M/s PCIT Vs Motisons Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd. (SC) Order Dt. 07/03/2022
Hon’ble SC held that In our view, the High Court was not right and justified in disposing of the appeal with one paragraph order without discussing the issues which arose for consideration. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set-aside the view taken by the High Court and remit the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration. Income Tax Appeal No.137 of 2018 is thus restored to the file of the High Court to be decided afresh and purely on its own merits.
Goods and Services Tax Law Updates:
AAR/Case Laws/Judgements
Classification of paintings, Old cars, Old jewellery, Antique jewellery, Old watches, Antique watches & Antique Books. The provisions of Rule 32(5) of CGST Rules will be applicable in respect of second hand goods i.e used goods.
In Re: Teamlease Education Foundation (KARNATAKA-AAR KAR ADRG 07/2022) Order dated 08-03-2022
The Applicant does not qualify to be a pure agent of the Industry partner to the extent of reimbursement received towards stipend paid to Trainees on behalf of Industry partner as part of training agreement and therefore the said reimbursement is chargeable to GST.
In Re: Ionbond Coatings Pvt. Ltd (MAHARASHTRA-AAR) Order dated 08-03-2022
Coating services are in the nature of job work services, covered under Entry at item (id) under heading 9988 of Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax Rate dated 28.06.2017 as amended by Notification No. 20/2019- Central Tax (Rate) dt. 30.09.2019 attracting 12% GST.
Updates from Other Laws:
RBI launches UPI for feature phones; now no smartphone and internet needed for making payments. [RBI Press Release dt. 08-03-2022]
As of now, the UPI system has been limited to smartphones with internet connections only. Non-smartphone users could not take benefit of the UPI system. In order to encourage the digital payment ecosystem, the Reserve Bank of India launched UPI payments service for feature phones. This will bring non-smartphone users to the platform and enable them to pay digitally without needing an internet connection.
RBI cautions public not to fall prey on commitments by third-party for early redressal of grievances on payment of fees [RBI Press Release dt. 09-03-2022]
The RBI has cautioned the general public about the Integrated Ombudsman Scheme 2021 (RB-IOS) conveying to the public to lodge their complaints against Regulated Entities (REs) through third parties for a charge/fee. RBI clarified that it does not have any such arrangement with any entity for redressal of any grievances against the Regulated Entities (RE). RB-IOS is a cost-free grievance redress mechanism, which does not involve payment of fees or charges in any form or manner.
![Weekly Newsletter Income Tax, GST and Other Law [2nd Week, April, 2022]](https://taxindiaupdates.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Untitled-120x120.png)
