TIOL-DDT 2837 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body>
<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=23157"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/limca_book2015_1.jpg" alt="DDT in Limca Book of Records - Third Time in a row" width="300" height="148" hspace="5" border="0" align="right" ></a>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">TIOL-DDT 2837</font><br>
03 05 2016<br>
Tuesday
</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em>Income Tax - TDS - Assessees to submit proof of claims</em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AS</strong> per Section 192(1) of the Income Tax Act, the employer is required to deduct tax (TDS) on the salaries paid to the employees. By Section 192(2D) inserted by last year's Finance Act, the deductor employer <em>for the purposes of estimating income of the assessee or computing tax deductible under sub-section (1), obtain from the assessee the evidence or proof or particulars of prescribed claims under the provisions of the Act in such form and manner as may be prescribed.</em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the CBDT has amended the Income Tax Rules to prescribe the form and manner.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A new Rule 26C is inserted which provides that the assessee shall furnish to the person responsible for making payment under sub-section (1) of section 192, the evidence or the particulars of the claims referred to in sub-rule (2), in Form No.12BB for the purpose of estimating his income or computing the tax deduction at source.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The evidence to be produced:</font></p>
<div align="justify">
<table width="90%" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sl. No </font></strong></p></td>
<td><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nature of claims </font></strong></p></td>
<td><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Evidence or particulars </font></strong></p></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1) </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2) </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3) </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">House Rent Allowance. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Name, address and permanent account number of the landlord/landlords where the aggregate rent paid during the previous year exceeds rupees one lakh. </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Leave travel concession or assistance. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Evidence of expenditure. </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Deduction of interest under the head<em> "Income from house property"</em>. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Name, address and permanent account number of the lender. </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">4. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Deduction under Chapter VI-A. </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Evidence of investment or expenditure. </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTk2MTg=" target="_blank">CBDT Notification No. 30/2016., Dated: April 29, 2016</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><font color="#006600"><strong><a name="f1"></a>No Service Tax Paid on Tatkal Tickets by Indian Railways</strong></font></em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IT</strong> looks as if the Indian Railways have not paid the Service Tax on Tatkal Tickets, cancellation charges and Bed Rolls charges. It is understood that the office of the Principal Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi-1 has written a polite letter to the Adviser, Accounts of the Rail Board that it has come to the notice of the Service Tax office that Railways and its zones are not discharging Service Tax properly on the following issues and there is short collection and short payment of tax on the same.</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. Tatkal Charges/Premium Tatkal charges</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. Cancellation Charges</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. Bed Roll Charges</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Service Tax Commissionerate has requested the Railways to provide Zone-wise income received under the above heads during the financial year 2011-12 to 2015-16.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Additional Commissioner who has issued the letter informs the Railways that the letter has been issued with the approval of the Principal Commissioner, Service Tax.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If the Railways have not really paid the Service Tax, the demand will run into hundreds of crores. Will there be a penalty on the Railways?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/NewsDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MjY3NTc=" target="_blank"><strong>DDT 2827 18 04 2016</strong></a>, I had briefly mentioned this issue - </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#DFF4F4" span="span"><strong>Evasion by Government?</strong> It is heard that the Ministry of Finance is already investigating the Ministry of Railways for alleged evasion of Service Tax. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If the Railways have not collected this tax from the passengers, it is gone forever. They cannot go back to the passengers to recover this tax. Then, what is the use if the Finance Ministry of the Government of India collects the tax with a penalty from the Rail Ministry of the Government of India? If the case goes to the Court, will the Attorney General represent the Finance Ministry or the Rail Ministry? Is it Revenue Neutral when one department of the Government collects tax from another department which cannot be passed on to the consumer? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Who will win this IRS vs IRS battle?</font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><font color="#006600"><em><a name="f2"></a>Anti Dumping Duty on Measuring Tapes</em></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</STRONG> has imposed anti dumping duty on 'Measuring Tapes' originating in or exported from the Chinese Taipei, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The anti-dumping duty imposed under this notification shall be effective for a period of five years (unless revoked, superseded or amended earlier) from the date of publication of this notification - 2nd May 2016. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTk2MjE=" target="_blank">Notification No. 16/2016-Customs (ADD)., Dated: May 2, 2016</a></font></strong></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><strong><a name="f3"></a>Income Tax - Consistency in taxability of income/loss arising from transfer of unlisted shares - CBDT clarification</strong></em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BOARD</STRONG> feels that for determining the tax-treatment of income arising from transfer of unlisted shares for which no formal market exists for trading, a need has been felt to have a consistent view in assessments pertaining to such income. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It has, accordingly, been decided that the income arising from transfer of unlisted shares would be considered under the head 'Capital Gain', irrespective of period of holding, with a view to avoid disputes/litigation and to maintain uniform approach. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">However this decision will not be applicable to the situations where: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">i. the genuineness of transactions in unlisted shares itself is questionable; or </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ii. the transfer of unlisted shares is related to an issue pertaining to lifting of corporate veil; or </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">iii. the transfer of unlisted shares is made along with the control and management of underlying business </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTk2MjA=" target="_blank">CBDT Letter in F.No.225/12/2016/ITA.II., Dated: May 02, 2016</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><font color="#006600"><em><a name="f4"></a>135 Crore Service Tax Demand on Blue Star</em></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BLUE</STRONG> Star Ltd has informed the National Stock Exchange of India that it has received an order from the Principal Commissioner of Service Tax-1, Commissionerate, Kolkata holding that there has been alleged short payment of service tax amounting to around Rs. 67.86 crores during the period 2007-08 to 2011-12 in their Kolkata location on the basis of purported examination of the company's records etc. and comparing it with the Service Tax Returns filed by the said location during the said period. The Commissioner has also imposed penalty of Rs. 67.86 crores equal to the tax demand under Sec. 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 apart from interest (not quantified in the order) to be paid in terms of Sec. 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 on the tax demanded.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Company informs NSE that <em>the order is a complete departure from a ruling by the competent authority in an identical matter at another jurisdiction, in which after examination of the company's similar records, the demand notice raised by the Service Tax department was quashed. Based on the advice received from its tax advisors, the Company ­ strongly believes that the said order apart from being patently erroneous, been passed without appropriately considering the submissions made by the ­ company, is based on incorrect presumptions and hence is untenable.</em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>The Company will challenge the said order before the appropriate forum in accordance with law and is confident about a positive outcome. This disclosure is issued in terms of Regulation 30 of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements), Regulations, 2015, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Company before any regulatory authority or Tribunal or a Court.</em></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em><a name="f5"></a>Monetary Limit for Filing Appeal in the Tribunal/Court - CBEC Clarifies</em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC</strong> draws the attention of the Chief Commissioners to:</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. Board's Instruction dated 17.12.2015 <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=25540" target="_blank"><strong>DDT 2748 18.12.2015</strong></a> by which the Board had fixed monetary limits below which appeal shall not be filed in the Tribunal/Courts by the Department,</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. Board's Instruction dated 26.12.2014 <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=22395" target="_blank"><strong>DDT 2505 29.12.2014</strong></a> clarifying that the instruction shall apply to case of recurring nature and no appeal shall be filed in cases of recurring nature if the amount involved is less than the prescribed threshold.</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">After the amendments made in the instruction dated 17.08.2011 by the instruction dated 17.12.2015, paragraph 3 of the instruction dated 26.12.2014 is </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">amended as follows:</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>It is hereby clarified that the existing Instruction regarding applicability of monetary limits to cases of recurring nature need to be examined in light of subclause 'c' added vide instruction dated 17.12.2015. Therefore, in all cases, of "classification and refund issues which are of legal and/or recurring nature", appeals wherever merited will be filed irrespective of the amount involved.</em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board wants the Chief Commissioners to take note of the above clarification while processing appeals before the Tribunal and Courts.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTk2MjI=" target="_blank">CBEC Instruction in F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC/Pt-III., Dated April 27 2016</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><strong><font color="#006600"><a name="f6"></a>Notice for voluntary retirement/resignation - CBEC Instructions</font></strong></em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BOARD</STRONG> observes that despite clear directions, even now, proposals are referred to the Board in a routine manner at the fag end of the expiry of the period of notice for VRS and that too without verifying the veracity/genuineness of the grounds for VRS and without giving adequate/sufficient convincing reasons and recommendation of the Zonal head thereon. Further, clarifications sought are provided in piecemeal and at a very late stage thereby not leaving sufficient time for the Board for proper examination and also resulting in putting avoidable strain on the already overburdened system. Delay in deciding VRS cases have been viewed very seriously by the higher authorities.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board now wants the proposals to be sent two months before the intended date of retirement duly signed by the concerned Chief Commissioner/Director General.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board has prescribed the following guidelines:</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(i) On receipt of the application/notice for VRS under Rule 48 or 48A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, a letter may be issued immediately requesting the officer to continue on duty till the decision of the competent authority is communicated to him.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(ii) Any request for VRS under Rule 48 will first be examined by the concerned Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner/Director General. Request for VRS by officers stating personal reasons, family grounds/reasons/circumstances without specifying detailed grounds may not be considered and the officer may be asked to amplify reasons or grounds for seeking VRS with copies of all the supporting documents, if any. Thereafter, such cases will be recommended to the Board</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(iii) Any request for VRS under Rule 48A will first be examined on merit by the concerned Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner/Director General and only if they are convinced that there are sufficient and reasonable grounds for seeking VRS, such cases will be recommended to the Board. Request for VRS by officers stating personal reasons, family grounds/reasons/circumstances without specifying detailed grounds may not be considered and the officer may be asked to amplify reasons or grounds for seeking VRS with copies of all the supporting documents, if any.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(iv) In case of an officer of the rank of Assistant Commissioner, his/her vigilance status prior to his/her promotion to the grade of Assistant Commissioner may be provided, alongwith no dues certificate and certificate of qualifying service of the Administration Unit and recommendation of the concerned Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner/Director General.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(v) The proposal may be sent to the Board in the proforma two months before the intended date of retirement, without fail.</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The above instructions may be noted by all concerned for strict compliance.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Chief Commissioners should be really concerned when their officers want to leave the organisation.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTk2MjM=" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC F.No.26014/13/2015-Ad.IIA., Dated May 02 2016</strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><font color="#006600"><em><a name="f7"></a>Right to Information - CIC Issues Notice to 108 Delhi VAT Officers</em></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AN</strong> Appellant before the Central Information Commission had sought for details of cash refunds in the D-VAT returns filed online from the financial year 2013 till date. He also wanted to know the number of dealers to whom refund was sanctioned and credited within the period of two months u/s 38 of DVAT Act and also the number of dealers who were sanctioned refunds beyond the statutory period along with the interest permissible. Generally, the online Tax Returns filed by the registered dealers will contain details of refund claimed mandatorily. If refund is sanctioned, such amount gets credited automatically to account of dealer and delay if any has to be paid u/s 42 of DVAT Act.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The CPIO has simply forwarded the RTI request to all 108 Ward PIOs to furnish the information. All of them replied stating <em>"NIL"</em>, or <em>"No such record is available"</em>, <em>"no complete detail is available"</em> etc, but did not provide relevant information which they were expected to have automatically on line.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Appellant stated that when everything is submitted in online mechanism how they could claim that such information was not available.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Commission was surprised to know that the office of Commissioner DV at is having no concern for the revenue related record keeping and allowed their 108 PIOs to give a false or incomplete reply. It is beyond comprehension that DVAT office does not have 'refund' details, which is a very significant issue of governance and also enforcement of rule of law.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Commission found it as a fit case to initiate penal proceedings against all 108 PIOs representing 108 wards in New Delhi and also its past and present CPIOs, who simply forwarded the RTI question and the replies back to the appellant without any application of mind.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Commission directed the then Central PIO, along with each of 108 ward PIOs to show cause why maximum penalty should not be imposed against each of them for not providing correct information or suppressing the information or giving wrongful/incomplete information besides non-compliance of order of FAA (First Appellate Authority).</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Have a nice day.</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mail your comments to <a href="mailto:vijaywrite@tiol.in"><strong>vijaywrite@tiol.in</strong></a></font></p>
</body>
</html>