Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

Is it fair for the draftsmen to draft provisions that lack clarity and assertion ?

Is It fair

1. Introduction :


Our legislative process involves various stages — viz.
introduction of the Bill, deliberations (if any) in the Parliament and then the
Bill with amendments, if any, which is passed is assented to by the Hon’ble
President. It is our experience that the Bill, on its introduction, is heatedly
debated upon among tax practitioners. How many of the suggestions resulting from
the debate reach the Finance Minister, and thereafter how much time the
Parliamentarians spend on it, are in the realm of conjecture. And finally, what
comes out as the ‘Act’ may be altogether at times contrary to what the FM states
on the floor of the House. Therefore, it is questionable as to what
extent the legislative intent really gets reflected in the provisions that
become law. In this article, I propose to draw the readers’ attention to some of
the provisions which become almost ineffective since they are worded in a vague
and un-assertive language.

2. Instances of vague wordings :


2.1 S. 50C Ss.(2) :


Without prejudice to the provisions of Ss.(1), where :

(a) the assessee claims before any AO that the value
adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation authority U/ss.(1) exceeds the fair
market value of the property as on the date of transfer;

(b) the value so adopted or assessed by the stamp valuation
authority U/ss.(1) has not been disputed in any appeal or revision or no
reference has been made before any other authority, Court or the High Court,

the Assessing Officer may refer the valuation of the
capital asset to a Valuation Officer and where any such reference is made, the
provisions of Ss.(2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of S. 16A, clause (i) of Ss.(1)
and Ss.(6) and Ss.(7) of S. 23A, Ss.(5) of S. 24, S. 34AA, S. 35 and S. 37 of
the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), shall, with necessary modifications,
apply in relation to such reference as they apply in relation to a reference
made by the Assessing Officer under Ss.(1) of S. 16A of that Act.

Now, the ambiguities are :



  • The word used is ‘may’. That means there is no obligation on the AO ?



  • The apparent meaning is that AO can refer to DVO only at the instance of the
    assessee. But it is not so stated categorically; and the I.T. Department is
    referring the cases to DVO in an arbitrary manner.



2.2 S. 154(8) Rectification :



Ss.(8) of S. 154 provides that the authority shall pass an
order within a period of six months from the end of the month in which the
application is received by it :

(a) Making the amendment; or

(b) Refusing to allow the claim.


Now, it is not clear as to what happens if the authority does
not pass any order. And in almost all the cases this is the reality !

2.3 Ss.(2) of S. 12AA. It reads as follows :


Every order granting or refusing registration
under clause (b) of Ss.(1) shall be passed before the expiry of six months from
the end of the month in which the application was received under clause (a).

But it is silent as to the consequences of failure to pass
the order. However, the Bangalore Tribunal in Karnataka Golf Association v.
Deputy Director of Income Tax,
(2004) 91 ITD 1 has held that if no order is
passed within the stipulated time, registration is deemed to have been granted.

2.4 Ss.(6A) of S. 250 :


It is reproduced below :

(6A) In every appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), where it
is possible, may hear and decide such appeal within a period of one year from
the end of the financial year in which such appeal is filed before him under
Ss.(1) of S. 246A.


Conclusion :

It is not enough that an obligation is created on the
authorities. It should be coupled with a remedy in the hands of the assessee for
non-observance of the provisions on the part of the authorities.

levitra

Completion of ‘Four years of Right to Information Act’

Lecture Meeting

Subject : Completion of ‘Four years of Right to
Information Act’
— A meeting organised by BCAS jointly with IMC and P.C.
Governance Trust

Venue : I.M.C. Hall, Churchgate, Mumbai.

Date : 12th October, 2009


Part-A :

A brief report on proceedings of the meeting.

On 12th October, 2009 the BCA Society, Indian Merchants’
Chamber and P. C. Governance Trust jointly organised the above meeting in
which many august institutions and NGOs in the city participated in
celebrating the Fourth Anniversary of Right to Information Act introduced on
12th October, 2005.

(1) The meeting started with opening speech of Julio
Rebeiro representing, Indian Merchants’ Chamber. The speaker outlined the
objective and purpose of the Act and gave valuable suggestions on strategy to
be adopted for effective implementation. He expressed his satisfaction that
not only masses in cities but also in villages are becoming aware of the
utility of the Act, which will help in checking corruption and will make Govt.
authorities accountable and answerable.

(2) Narayan Varma representing BCAS Foundation said that
his Foundation has started RTI Clinic and is attending through telephone
service the complaints and grievances of the members of public. The Foundation
publishes articles in newspapers, writes books, articles and publications
which are widely appreciated. He stressed the need to make public movement
more effective.

(3) Anand Castolino of Bombay Catholic Sabha, informed that
his institution organises many meetings in various parts of city of schools
and college students, senior citizens and many others. The persons attending
the meetings participate actively. Every week, clinic is held in the Mahim
office to help persons suffering in hands of corrupt and irresponsible Govt.
authorities.

(4) Paramjeet Singh explained work done by his Dharma RTI
Mission. His concern has established Help Centres aided with computer and
other equipments. The RTI Help Centre is focussing on collecting information
from schools, colleges about non-receipt of Govt. grants and provides
assistance in filing applications. The slum areas in Govandi are also visited
where meetings are held of residents to register their grievances. These are
then forwarded to concerned offices and are followed up thereafter.

(5) Ashok Ravat represented Forum of Free Enterprise, M. R.
Pai Foundation and N. A. Palkhiwala Memorial Trust. He complained about the
road blocks created by administrative persons in replying the applications
filed. The authorities invariably try to take shelter u/s.8 of the RTI Act to
avoid giving answers to questions raised and to furnish details. He informed
that Books, Guides and Information materials are published explaining various
provisions of the Act and Rules. The forum of free Enterprise is also keeping
in touch with Bank Depositors Association. Instances of frauds on depositors
by private banks and co-op. banks have become rampant. Unfortunately a
favourite plea is put forth by those Banks that they are outside the scope of
the Act. He stressed the need to remedy this unfortunate position. Another
road block put in by Govt. authorities is the common plea that the question
does not fit in definition of information. To overcome this, his organisations
are advising those applicants to approach State Information Commission since
S. 81 empowers the Commission to investigate into complaints.

(6) Mr. Rasikbhai representing Tarun Mitra Mandal, reported
that his organisation is conducting various seminars, programmes in Mumbai,
Thane and Navi Mumbai to train public on use of RTI Act effectively. His RTI
centre assists public in drafting applications, appeals and other procedural
matters for better implementation.

(7) The above representations were followed by short
lectures of a few students of law college.

In concluding remarks, the Chairman expressed satisfaction
that the movement is gathering momentum. He hoped that there will be proper
reciprocation from authorities in Govt. and public sector undertakings to make
the legislation meaningful and will bring transparency and will reduce
corruption. Hon. Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud was then requested to enlighten
the audience on this occasion.

Part-B :


Speech of Hon. Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud, Mumbai High
Court

The Hon. speaker said that the society should look to the
legislation not as a tool to raise issues but should consider it as a
movements and as an effective tool to achieve goal of transparency, efficiency
and should inculcate a spirit of social commitment amongst Public servants. It
should become a new way of life, an awakening in the society. It should
replace the apathy, the indifference in the heart of a citizen and should
encourage him to raise his voice against malpractices, which will improve
radically the functioning of Public bodies. The act will replace scepticism
with optimism, will replace apathy with active interest, will replace feeling
of absence of power with sense of actual power. It will encourage involvement,
by shedding indifference and alienation. It will replace the governance from
the hands of administrators into the hands of subjects who are the
beneficiaries. The reports that are published about the issue of non-receipt
of pensions, non- receipt of ration cards, distribution of lands to landless,
issues concerning Aanganwadi, Balwadi and variety of issue concerning
millions.

The Hon. speaker shared his experience on many of those
issues coming before the judiciary, where the judiciary could realise the hard
reality about the injustice done to the subject, by administrators.

Hon. Justice Chandrachud stressed, that there can be no
development without empowerment. Both are interwoven providing information
about governance is a sure way to empower the citizen in quest for
development.

‘At basic level, the right to information provides access to information. It is a means to an end and not an end in itself. There is a much deeper meaning in right to information. It means governance, which makes administrators realise their accountability to society. Though today we are at the threshold, the efforts should be in the direction of attaining the goal at availing access freely without barriers. Dealing with issues concerning judiary, Hon. Chandrachud said that de-regulation is becoming a Mantra of the day, in process of greater involvement of private sector. Impact of liberalisation or deregulation. Right to know is a constitutional right and the same cannot be abrogated confining the scope of the Act only to Govt. administration or public bodies.

Definition of Information given in the Act, covers information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a Public authority under any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, according to Hon. speaker, what can be accessed by Public authority can be accessed by any individual citizen also. Therefore, though the implementation is presently focussed on Public governance or Public officials, it has to be extended to private governance in course of time.

The implementation will have to be carried out at two different levels. Firstly, creating awareness of right in all stratas of society in Urban and Rural areas. It should be institutionalised by going beyond individuals. Their experiences should be shared. For easy and quick access the speaker said that the judicial Dept. has developed a software to have quick reference to pendancies of cases before the Court. Taking it as sample, softwares can be developed to have an access to statistics about issues regarding disposal of pending applications, subjectwise areawise, the information as to whether Appeals are disposed of expeditiously or not and other administrative issues. Mechanisation of operations in every part of functioning will greatly help attaining process of transparency and administrative efficiency. S. 8 of the Act is misused by authorities to deny access to information. But unless the information is of commercial confidence or related to national security, the access can not be denied. We need an era, where disclosure must be the norm and suppression of information should be an exception. It is only then the goal of having a free society with informed citizens can be attained.

The meeting terminated with a vote of thanks to Hon. Justice Chandrachud and to all dignitaries representing activist organisations for actively participating in the meeting.

Foreign Investments in Real Estate

Lecture Meeting

Subject : Foreign Investments in Real Estate



Speaker : Rajesh Kapadia, Chartered Accountant,


Past President, BCAS


Venue : I.M.C. Hall, Churchgate, Mumbai.



Date :
16th July 2008








(1) While reviewing the trend of prices of real estate over
the past three decades and while identifying the reasons for spurt in real
estate prices year after year, the speaker Mr. Kapadia candidly observed that
apart from other economic factors the main cause is the utter failure of the
Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1973 in attaining the declared objective for which it
was enacted. The objective of controlling the rising prices and bringing rates
of residential flats within reach of common man failed miserably. During the
period of emergency in the country and a few years thereafter, the prices of
residential flats were in the range of Rs.70 to Rs.80 per sq.ft. in South
Mumbai. Between 1986 to 1993 the prices remained fairly stable.

(2) After 1995 there is unprecedented rise in real estate
prices year after year. Now a new trend has emerged amongst the class of
developers of specialising in different categories, such as construction
projects for residential complexes, commercial spaces, hospitality i.e.,
hotels, industrial parks, malls and similar projects.

(3) To regulate the development projects, the regulating
authorities issued two Press Notes. But even these Press Notes excluded certain
categories from its purview e.g., Press Note 2 does not deal with
industrial park developments, which comes under automatic route. Similar
position exists in cases of development of warehousing, hotels, etc.

(4) As regards regulating the provisions applicable to
foreign investment in real estate developments, the speaker said that there are
four or five segments available to foreign investors who are either NRIs or
foreign venture capital investors or foreign institutional investors. For each
of these categories there are different norms.

(5) Regulations prohibit participation of foreigners in real
estate business as traders per se. However, real estate business does not
include development of townships, construction of residential and commercial
premises, roads, etc.

(6) On following two dates viz. 6th July 1991 and 3rd
March 2005, drastic changes were introduced in regulations which have made the
real estate business an attractive proportion to foreign investors. From 12th
January 2005 the permission of Govt. hitherto required for foreign investors was
done away with. As per Press Note No. 2, hundred percent investment in
development projects of townships, hotels and roads was allowed to non-resident
investors subject to the following conditions :

(a) For development of housing project, investment in land
acquisition of minimum 10 hectares which is equal to 25 acres, will be the
precondition. The question that needs consideration is whether a 100% subsidiary
Co. of a foreign company can acquire agricultural land for development. The
answer is that if the law of the State in which such agricultural land is
situated, permits such acquisition, then such company can purchase agricultural
land provided it takes steps to convert agricultural land into non-agricultural
land and uses it for development of building and not for purposes of
agriculture.

(b) Capitalisation norms and restrictions :


A foreigner making investment through a subsidiary in India
will be obliged to invest at least 10 million dollars. If investment is made
with Indian joint venture partner, then capital contribution will be 5 million
dollars. The investment should be within 6 months from commencement with lock-in
period of 3 years from date of investment.

(c) What constitutes joint venture :


The ratio of investment in such joint venture need not be
equal. The foreign investors can have dominating percentage. As regards period
of six months from commencement, Press Note No. 2 provides that the date should
be counted from the date when agreement to subscribe shares is entered into
between co-venturers. The minimum prescribed amount of 5 million is to be
brought in within six months. The condition of lock-in period of 3 years applies
to minimum investment and not to additional investment over and above minimum
investment.

(d) Time period for completion of project :


At least 50% of the project has to be completed within five
years from the date from which all the clearances are obtained. The investor
will not be permitted to sell undeveloped plot. It means that before effecting
any sale, he must have completed development of plot by carrying out
construction of roads, water supply lines, drainage, water storage and related
facilities. It means, the investor must develop 10 hectares of project plot
before effecting sale.

(7) The speaker then observed that the boom in real estate
trade is attributable to excess liquidity in the economy. Many foreign investors
find that they are suffering cash crunch though the lock-in period is yet not
over. For making the development project viable, they have already invested
funds over, say, 25 crores plus Stamp Duty @ 1% and if at that stage any
disputes or difficult situation arises, then to meet the liquidity challenges
the only way is to dispose of their surplus investment over minimum by
transferring their shares or to liquidate holdings through buy back of shares or
to liquidate the company. In another situation if construction has already
started but if constructed area cannot be disposed of profitably, the investor
will face serious difficulty. Where development of land, say, of 10,000 sq.
meters is undertaken, then built-up area of 50,000 sq.mtrs. will be available
assuming FSI of 5. In the event response to constructed area is very poor, then
the loss may be much higher. The foreign investor has to keep in mind all such
situations.

8) The speaker then clarified that in the event the project fetches good profit, then dividend can be declared, subject to transfer of required percentage to reserves.

9) As regards companies in real estate, with huge capital investment of, say, 100 crores, the foreign borrowing for purchase of land is not permitted. Such borrowing’s are permitted only for financing construction work. As issue of shares at premium is possible, in such a case the capital base can propor-tionately be kept smaller. However, it is necessary to look into Reserve Bank guidelines. The amount of premium can be considered, for satisfying the condition of minimum capitalisation. External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) is not permitted. On
1-6-2008 the Government has put a bar on issue of non-convertible preference shares or non-convertible debentures. Debentures must be convertible and time frame for conversion has to be observed. But, if the company has committed to issue non-convertible debentures prior to 1st June 2008, then such company can continue with its commitment. In another situation if company wants to change over to convertible debentures, then Reserve Bank should be approached before taking such step.

10) Another aspect is satisfying valuation norms prescribed by the Controller of Capital Issues, pre-vailing up to 1992. Though this order was abolished, valuation rules prescribed by CCI regulations still continue.

11) As regards conversion of preference shares in equity shares, such conversion is treated as transfer for ascertaining capital gains liability of shareholder.

12) As regards conversion of debentures into shares, S. 47(10) of the Income-tax Act provides that the same will not be regarded as transfer. Transfer of shares by one foreign Co. to another foreign Co. requires no permission, nor is it governed by transfer pricing rules, nor by pricing guidelines. The same principle applies to transfer by one NRI to another NRI. Where transfer of shares is from person resident in India to non-resident, no approval is required. This however is subject to compliance of guidelines, set out in circular of RBI of October 2004 and pricing guidelines.

13) Any gift by a resident to a resident outside India needs RBI approval. Where there is a transfer by a person outside India to a resident in India, the repatriation of price realised above fair value will not be permitted to such non-resident.

14) Mr. Kapadia then stressed the need on the part of non-resident investor to give serious thought to structuring aspects of joint venture investment, by planning of route to be adopted, by studying the provisions of DTAA, and FEMA, whereby the tax effect can be minimised and his investment will be ideally tax effective and cost effective.

15) The speaker thereafter touched upon the various segments of real estate trade. It cannot just be restricted to conventional form of construction of buildings, but also takes into consideration other forms. The capital investment requirement and form of organisational set-up vary from each other. The few illustrations are:

a) Real estate management company needs to have minimum net worth of 5 crores.

b) There was one more category of O.CB., where 60% of holdings were owned by non-residents. Now, 50% of Directors of such real estate management company should be financing directors. The unit should invest in real estate projects of which 80% should be in completed projects and maximum up to 20% in incomplete project. Investment in vacant land is not permitted. These provisions at present are in a draft form till guidelines are notified.

c) The other avenues in real estate are development of service plots, residential or commercial premises, development of townships, investment in manufacture of building materials, investment in joint ventures, and similar other forms of organisation. In respect of many of the avenues there are no limiting or restrictive conditions like minimum capitalisation or lock-in period. The only requirement is the investor should be an NRI, a person of Indian origin. All these investments will be on repatriable basis.

d) As regards foreign venture capital investors fund, clause 5(5) of Foreign Venture Capital Fund Regulations of 1998 plays an important role. The constitution of a venture capital undertaking has to be a company whose shares are not listed on a recognised stock exchange in India and which should not be engaged in an indus-try specified in negative list. The advantage is lock-in restriction and pricing restriction are done away with.

16. Regulations  Re : Real  Estate  Mutual  Fund:

The only requirement is that management of such mutual fund shall have at least 5 years expertise in real estate trade. The investment should be in a specified real estate asset and not in incomplete projects or projects under construction. It must be located in India and in such city as may be specified. The property should not be subject matter of any litigation. At least 35% of net assets of the fund will have to be invested directly into real estate asset and therefore such mutual fund will not be equity-oriented mutual fund. Distribution made by mutual fund will be subject to dividend distribution tax. The investment can also be made in shares, debentures, mortgage-backed securities. The investment in these can be 75% and balance 25% in any securities. No real estate mutual fund can invest more than 25% of its capital in unlisted shares. The NAV of the real estate mutual fund shall be published every 90 days.

17. While concluding his talk, the speaker narrated a quotable quote of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru on the eve of Independence in 1947. Hon. Panditji said, “The achievement which we celebrate today is a step of opening as an opportunity to the greatest triumph. We should be wise enough to grab this opportunity and accept the challenge of future”. This statement applies even today in current economic scenario.

The meeting terminated with a vote of thanks to the speaker.

Business/Employment visa

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

Part D : Miscellaneous

  1. Business/Employment visa

The Ministry of Home Affairs has issued Frequently Asked Questions on
work-related visas issued by India, clarifying the purpose, duration and
various scenarios under which Business Visa/Employment Visa may be granted to
foreign nationals. These FAQ’s are available on www.mha.nic.in

levitra

Royalties and fees for technology transfer

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

Part D : Miscellaneous

  1. Royalties and fees for technology transfer

The Union cabinet has approved a proposal of the Department
of Industrial Policy & Promotion, Ministry of Commerce & Industry to permit
all payment for royalty, lump sum fee for transfer of technology, payment for
use of trademark/brand name on the automatic route without any restrictions,
and subject to FEMA(Current Account Transaction) Rules, 2000. To get the
information about the nature/details of technology and the amount paid for it,
a suitable post reporting requirement would be devised within three months in
consultation with the Department of Economic Affairs and Reserve Bank of
India.

levitra

Social Security Agreement with Netherlands

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1


Part D : Miscellaneous

  1. Social Security Agreement with Netherlands

The Government of India has signed a Social Security
Agreement with the Government of Netherlands on 22-10-2009.

levitra

Dispute Resolution Panel Rules, 2009 — Notification No. 84/2009 [F. No. 142/22/2009-TPL], dated 20-11-2009.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Dispute Resolution Panel Rules, 2009 — Notification No.
    84/2009 [F. No. 142/22/2009-TPL], dated 20-11-2009.

Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism was introduced by
Finance (No. 2 )Act, 2009 and consequently Section 144C is introduced w.e.f.
1st April, 2009.

Dispute Resolution Panel Rules, 2009 are introduced and the
rules shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official
Gazette. The said Rules provide for the procedure for filing objection,
procedure for the hearing by the panel, passing of the assessment order by the
panel and rectification thereof and appeal before the ITAT, etc. The Rules
also prescribe formats of Form Nos. 35A and 36B.

levitra

Income-tax Department’s website has offered a facility to enable the assessees to ascertain whether the Income-tax Department has received ITR V at Bangalore. The procedure is as follows :

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Income-tax Department’s website has offered a facility to
    enable the assessees to ascertain whether the Income-tax Department has
    received ITR V at Bangalore. The procedure is as follows :



(i) Log-in at the Department’s website using the e-filing
log-in ID and Password.

(ii) After the log-in is successful, click on the ‘My
Account’ tab at the top of the window.

(iii) Select the last option ‘E-filing processing status’.

(iv) Provide the assessment year.

(v) The next screen will provide information whether ITR V
is received and the date of receipt.

(vi) There is a hyperlink to obtain the confirmation
receipt.


levitra

Part A — Taxability of sovereign activities

Health check-up and treatment services

fiogf49gjkf0d

Service TaxRenting of Immovable Property
Retrospective
Validation :

Background :


W.e.f 1-6-2007 the Central Government included within the
definition of taxable service a service provided or to be provided to any
person, by any other person in relation to renting of immovable property for use
in the course or furtherance of business or commerce
. Renting included
letting, leasing, licensing or other similar arrangement. The phrase ‘for use in
the course or furtherance of business or commerce’ was said to include use of
immovable property as factories, office buildings, warehouses, theatres,
exhibition halls and multiple-use building. Some residential and other
properties were excluded from the scope of this service.

The levy of service tax on renting of immovable property was
challenged through writ petitions before High Courts in different parts of the
country. Many property owners began paying self-assessed tax on the rent amount
and passed on the said liability to the tenants. At the same time, many property
owners did not charge service tax pending disposal of writ petitions.

Implications of the levy on renting of immovable property and
issues arising therefrom have been discussed in detail in the August 2007 and
September 2007 issues of BCAJ.

The Delhi High Court in Home Solution Retail India Ltd. v.
Union of India & Others,
(2009) 14 STR 433 (Del.) held that service tax is a
tax on value addition provided by a service provider. It is obvious that it must
have connection with a service and there must be some value addition by that
service. If there is no value addition, then there is no service. Applying the
same to renting of immovable property service, the High Court observed as
under :

“There is no dispute that any service connected with the
renting of such immovable property would fall within the ambit of S.
65(105)(zzzz) and would be exigible to service tax. The question is whether
renting of such immovable property by itself constitutes a service and,
thereby, a taxable service. Service tax is a value added tax. It is a tax
on the value addition provided by some service providers. Insofar as renting
of immovable property for use in the course or furtherance of business or
commerce is concerned, any value addition could not be discerned.
Consequently, the renting of immovable property for use in the course or
furtherance of business or commerce by itself does not entail any value
addition and, therefore, cannot be regarded as a service.

In arriving at the aforesaid finding, the Delhi High Court
relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Tamil Nadu (T.N.) Kalyana
Mandapam Association v. UOI,
(2006) 3 STR 260 (SC) which, interestingly was
relied upon both by the appellants who had challenged the legality of the levy,
as well as by the respondents i.e., the Government of India. Based on a
detailed consideration of the aforesaid judgment, the Delhi High Court held that
the decision of the Supreme Court supported the argument of the appellants
before it and not the Government of India. With regard to the nature of the
service tax itself, the High Court held that it is a value added tax on value
addition done by the service provider and it must have a connection with the
service. Consequently, since mere renting of immovable property does not entail
any value addition, it could not be regarded as a service for that reason as
well.

The Delhi High Court observed in para 37 as :

. . . . We have not examined the alternative plea taken
by the petitioners with regard to legislative competence of the Parliament in
the context of Entry 49 of List II of the Constitution of India.



The Govt. filed an SLP against the said ruling which has been
admitted, but no stay has been granted against the Delhi HC Ruling. The same is
pending disposal.

Implications arising from the Delhi High Court Ruling have
been discussed in detail in the July 2009 issue of BCAJ.

Amendment by Finance Act, 2010 (‘Act’) :

Prior to the amendment, S. 65(105)(zzzz) of the Act defined
‘taxable service’ in the context of ‘renting of immovable property’ as under :

“(105) ‘taxable service’ means any service provided or to
be provided :

(a) to (zzzy) . . . . . .

(zzzz) to any person, by any other person in relation to
renting of immovable property for use in the course or furtherance of business
or commerce.

Explanation 1. . . . . . .

The Finance Act, 2010 has nullified the Delhi High Court
Ruling by redefining ‘taxable service’ with retrospective effect from 1-6-2007
as under :

“(105) ‘taxable service’ means any service provided or to
be provided :

(a) to (zzzy)

(zzzz) to any person, by any other person, by renting of
immovable property or any other service in relation to such renting for use in
the course or furtherance of business or commerce.

Thus, henceforth a service provided by renting of immovable
property or a service ‘in relation to’ such renting of immovable property, is
now covered in the definition of taxable service. TRU Circular No. 334/1/2010 —
TRU (Annexure B), dated 26-2-2-10 clarifies as under :


Para 9.2

“In order to clarify the legislative intent and also bring
in certainty in tax liability the relevant definition of taxable service is
being amended to clarify that the activity of renting of immovable property
per se
would also constitute a taxable service under the relevant clause.
This amendment is being given retrospective effect from 1-6-2007.

Thus, renting of immovable property by itself is now
considered to be a taxable service. In the Finance Act 2010, it has been
declared as under :

No act or omission on the part of any person shall be
punishable as an offence which would not have been so punishable had this
amendment not come into force.



Implications of the amendment :

The amendment in the definition of taxable services seeks to bring within the service tax net the activity or renting of immovable property per se nullifying the position held in the Home Solutions case. It further seeks to overturn the said position w.e.f. 1-6-2007. Therefore any levy, demand, recovery or action in relation thereto taken by the authorities will be validated and no action against the same will be maintainable in a Court of law. Further, all refunds made consequent to the Delhi High Court Ruling in Home Solutions case, are liable to be overturned by virtue of this amendment.

Legality and constitutional validity of the amendment:

An important issue that arises for consideration is whether the amendment will withstand the test of constitutionality. Though the answer can only come by way of a final decision by the Courts of law, it becomes important to prima facie examine the same.

In the light of the Delhi High Court ruling in Home Solutions case, the amended provisions will be subject to judicial scrutiny. Questions which arose before the Delhi High Court would once again arise. Is the bare renting of immovable property a taxable service? Is there a continuous flow of service between the property owner and the tenant in such a scenario? Is there any value addition involved?

In addition, constitutional validity was not examined by the Delhi High Court in Home Solutions case. Hence, there would be fresh round of litigations on this ground too.

According to one school of thought, the amended provisions can be challenged for transgression of the constitutional line of control which divides the powers of the Union and the State Governments. In terms of Article 246(3) of the Constitution, the Legislature of any State has the exclusive power to make laws with respect to matters listed in List II to the Seventh Schedule. Taxation on transactions relating to immovable property is not within the legislative competency of the Central Government inasmuch as these matters fall under Entry 49 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.

S. 66 of the Act, which is the charging section for the purpose of levy of service tax, provides, for the levy of tax on the taxable services covered by S. 65(105) thereof. From a reading of the charging section, it is clear that service tax is a charge of tax on taxable services. The Supreme Court in Laghu Udyog Bharati v. Union of India, (1999) 112 ELT 365 (SC) has also held that service tax is a tax on services and is leviable on the service provider. The levy of service tax on the leasing or letting or rent-ing of immovable property may be illegal and ultra vires Article 246 of the Constitution of India.

According to another school of thought, in terms of the Supreme Court Ruling in TN Kalyana Manda-pam (supra), levy of service tax on renting of immovable property is constitutionally valid.

In the light of the foregoing, a fresh round of litigations is likely as regards legality and Constitutional validity as well of the retrospective amendment made in regard to renting of immovable property.

Some issues:

Implications on property owners:

The retrospective amendment in renting of im-movable property has been challenged through writ petitions in various courts of the country and interim stay has been granted in some cases. The benefit of the same would be available to a property owner who is a petitioner/member of the petitioner association. However, it would be advisable for the petitioners, to make appropriate disclosures before service tax authorities by filing letters/through notes in service tax returns. In cases where, property owners charge service tax but the tenants refuse to pay, the detailed analysis and discussions in July, 2009 of BCAJ can be referred as to the various options that can be exercised by property owners and implications in regard to each option.

Interest implications:

In Pratibha Processors v. UOI, (1996) 88 ELT 12 (SC), it was observed by the Supreme Court as under:
“in fiscal statutes, the import of the words, — ‘tax’, ‘interest’, ‘penalty’, etc. are well known. They are different concepts. Tax is the amount payable as a result of the charging provision. It is a compulsory exaction of money by a public authority for public purpose, the payment of which is enforced by law. Penalty is ordinarily levied on an assessee for some contumacious conduct or a deliberate violation of the provisions of the particular statute. Interest is compensatory in character and is imposed on an assessee who has withheld payment of any tax as and when it is due and payable. The levy of interest is geared to actual amount of tax withheld and the extent of delay in paying the tax on due date. Essentially, it is compensatory and different from penalty — which is penal in character.” (p. 20).

Thus, interest is not a penalty, but is essentially compensatory in nature.

In the context of stay matters, it is a reasonably settled position to the effect that if a petitioner loses he would have to pay tax along with interest inasmuch as interest is compensatory as discussed above. However, in the context of retrospective amendment, whether this principle would apply is an issue.

In this connection, attention is invited to the Supreme Court Ruling in Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, (2006) 1 STR 73 (SC), wherein the following was observed in regard to liability to interest in cases of retrospective validation of levy on broadcasting services.

Para 7
“In any event, it is clear from the language of the validation clause, as quoted by us earlier, that the liability was extended not by way of clarification but by way of amendment to the Finance Act with retrospective effect. It is well established that while it is permissible for the Legislature to retrospectively legislate, such retrospective legislation is normally not per-missible to create an offence retrospectively.

There were clearly judgments, decrees or orders of Courts and Tribunals or other authorities, which were required to be neutralized by the validation clause. We can only assume that the judgments, decree or orders, etc. had, in fact, held that persons like the appellants were not liable as service providers. This is also clear from the Explanation to the validation Section, which says that no act or acts on the part of any person shall be punishable as an offence which would have been so punishable if the Section had not come into force.”

On the basis of Star India ruling, a view can be taken to the effect that there may be no interest liability for the past period. However, this view is likely to be disputed by the tax authorities, resulting in litigations.

Penalty implications:

It is a very well-settled position that in cases where matters involved are of controversial nature, no penalty can be imposed. Based on the same, it would appear that there may be no liability to penalties, provided appropriate disclosures are made before service tax authorities.

Vacant land leased for construction of building?: Under the unamended provisions, ‘vacant land’, whether or not having facilities clearly incidental to the use of such vacant land was excluded from the definition of ‘immovable property’. Thus, renting of such vacant land was not liable for service tax.

The Finance Act, 2010 has curtailed the above exclusion by bringing within the ambit of the immovable property ‘vacant land, given on lease or licence for construction of building or temporary structure at a later stage to be used for further-ance of business or commerce’. Thus, renting of vacant land on long-term lease for construction of commercial building or structure thereon in future would be liable for service tax.

Leases executed prior to the amendment:

An important issue that arises for consideration in case of leases executed prior to the amendment (in some cases such leases would have been ex-ecuted before the introduction of service tax).

It is pertinent to note that advances received in respect of all newly inserted taxable services (as well on those services the scope of which has been expanded) in the Finance Act, 2010, have been exempted by virtue of Notification No. 36/2010-ST, dated 28-6-2010. However, services falling under sub-clause (zzc) (Commercial Training or Coaching Service) and (zzzz) (Renting of Im-movable Property Service) of S. 65(105), [which have been given retrospective effect] have been kept out of this Notification.

No such retrospective effect has been given to renting of vacant land (on which some construction is to be made subsequently). Therefore, it would appear that advances received in respect of this renting of vacant land ought to be exempted on the same ground on which exemption to advances in respect of other newly inserted services and amended services has been given. The scope of Notification No. 36/2010-ST, dated 28-6-2010 needs to be clarified accordingly.

The issue involved has ramifications for a large number of assessees most of which are PSUs and local industrial corporations which are renting vacant land on a long-term lease with a explicit condition that the lessee would construct a factory or commercial building on such land.

This can also be seen from a perspective that the moment advance is received and lease agreement is signed, the taxable event of provision of service is completed. Thus, as per settled position, if the taxable event happened at the time when service tax was not leviable on that service, then service tax cannot be demanded later, on a pro rata basis or otherwise even if the service becomes taxable during the tenure of the lease. The Draft Point of Taxation Rules seems to support this position.

From the Service Tax Department’s perspective, they could argue that service is in the nature of continuous service. Hence, service tax needs to be discharged on a pro rata basis for the period post amendment.

In case of long -term leases, whether the same can be covered within the ambit of ‘renting’ at all, may have to be examined vis-à-vis provisions under principal laws governing transfer of property and related regulations.

Editor’s Note:

Recently, Hon. Punjab and Harayana High Court in the case of Shubh Timb Steels Ltd has upheld the consitutional validity of levy of service tax on renting of immovable property as also its retrospective application.

America’s wars

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

23. America’s wars


The book raises a troubling thought : What is it that,
generation after generation, impels America’s best and the brightest to lead
their country into war, with little clarity regarding national interests and war
aims, but pursued with an extraordinary passion and firepower that destroy the
lives of thousands of its soldiers and leave behind a horrendous debris of
devastated nations and cities, wrecked societies and broken peoples that take
decades to repair and heal ?

(Source: Extracts from Book Review by Talmiz Ahmad, a Diplomat,
of “Obama’s Wars” by Bob Woodward in
 

levitra

Girl power puts Gujarati lexicon at your fingertips

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Girl power puts Gujarati lexicon at your fingertips

If the online Gujarati lexicon has proved a boon for
translators or writers, this bunch of five 20-something girls ought to take
the credit. Their love for their mother tongue is phenomenal and so is their
passion for language. Hence, with the help of technology they have made words
available at your fingertips.

Sumaiya Vohra, Padma Javad, Maitri Shah, Shruti Amin and
Deval Vyas run an IT firm which handles jobs of researching and compiling
Gujarati words. After digitizing ‘Bhagwadgomandal’ — a major dictionary of
Gujarati language — their recent achievement was to put ‘lokkosh’, a Gujarati
lexicon, online.

(Source : The Times of India, 29-10-2009)

levitra

Virtual hub for books

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Virtual hub for books

Vishal Information Technologies, a BSE/NSE-listed digital
content solution company, recently unveiled www.coralhub.com, an online book
market place that offers facility to buy and sell books on the Net. Booklovers
can browse mote than 3 million titles using a customer-friendly, simple-to-use
interface that displays the book title with brief synopsis, author, discounted
price, and ISBN number. The ‘Sell Books’ section of the site allows users to
sell old books to those looking for a specific title at an affordable price.
The customers are not charged any shipping cost for delivery across India.

(Source : Business India Magazine, 1-11-2009)

levitra

Dormant bank accounts : RBI issues vital clarification

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Dormant bank accounts : RBI issues vital clarification

A couple of months back the RBI had issued detailed
guidelines on inoperative or dormant bank accounts — savings as well as
current account. It had stated that if there are no transactions in the
account for a period over two years, it is to be treated as dormant. Further,
for the purpose of classifying an account as inoperative, both the types of
transactions i.e., debit as well as credit transactions induced at the
instance of customers as well as third party should be considered.

RBI now states that there may be instances where the
customer has given a mandate for crediting the interest on Fixed Deposit
account to the Savings Bank account and there are no other operations in the
Savings Bank account. Some doubts have arisen whether such an account is to be
treated as inoperative account after two years.

In this connection, the Banker of the Banks has clarified
that since the interest on Fixed Deposit account is credited to the Savings
Bank accounts as per the mandate of the customer, the same should be treated
as a customer induced transaction. As such, the account should be treated as
operative account as long as the interest on Fixed Deposit account is credited
to the Savings Bank account. The Savings Bank account can be treated as
inoperative account only after two years from the date of the last credit
entry of the interest on Fixed Deposit account.

(Source : Internet & Media Reports, 4-11-2009)

levitra

News you can use ACES online

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. News you can use ACES online

Recently, the excise and service tax department unveiled
the Automation of Central Excise and Service Tax (ACES), a workflow-based
application software available at www.aces.gov.in. An application-based
facility, ACES would be installed at all the Central excise centres in
Bangalore and Hyderabad initially and throughout the country by end-2009,
enabling the assessees to do all transactions with the department through the
Net. ACES would completely replace the current mode of manual filing of
returns, payment of taxes, seeking of refund and rebate on duties, helping
assessees obtain registration under Central excise/service tax and also view
and track status of their document online. Some of the services offered online
include registration, filing and tracking of documents, e-mails of
business-related issues, payment of Central excise and service tax and a help
line.

(Source : Business India Magazine, 1-11-2009)

levitra

Prolonged use of cellphones causes cancer

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Prolonged use of cellphones causes cancer

Heavy mobile phone users face a higher risk of developing
cancers, according to a landmark international study overseen by the WHO.

Even though the conclusion of the research will be revealed
only later this year, a preliminary breakdown of the results found a
‘significantly increased risk’ of some brain tumours ‘related to use of mobile
phones for a period of 10 years or more’ in some studies.

The conclusion of the £ 20 million study, while not
definitive, will undermine assurances that the devices are safe. Several
countries, notably France, have started strengthening warnings in this regard
and American politicians are urgently investigating the risks.

The Interphone inquiry has been probing the link between
exposure to mobile phones and three types of brain tumour and a tumour of the
salivary gland. The landmark international project carried out research in 13
countries, interviewing tumour sufferers and people in good health to see
whether their mobile phone use differed. It questioned about 12,800 people
between 2000 and 2004, the report said.

However, a breakdown of the latest findings shows that six
of eight Interphone studies found some rise in the risk of glioma (the most
common brain tumour), with one finding a 39% increase.

(Source : The Times of India, 25-10-2009)

levitra

HC dismisses IT Dept. appeals due to delay

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

17. HC dismisses IT Dept. appeals due to delay


The Bombay High Court recently dismissed 40 appeals filed by
the Income-tax (IT) Department challenging 40 orders of the IT Tribunal, for not
filing its papers in time. The IT Department cited shortage of stamp papers as
reason for the delay. The Court dismissed the applications which were filed
after a delay of over one year.

The Court, however, held that a delay of one year in filing
an appeal was not inordinate in case of a department like IT that undertakes
‘large-scale litigation.’

The Court however allowed those applications seeking
condonation of delay between six days to 345 days, on the ground that they
provided a ‘reasonable explanation’ for the delay in filing appeal.

IT Department contended that every time the Department
receives an order from the IT Tribunal, a scrutiny report is prepared and sent
to the higher officials for approval.

(Source : Internet, 7-10-2008)

levitra

Barack Obama, the President-elect of USA delivered one of the finest speeches (extempore) on November 5, on winning the Presidential election. It moved many with its sheer poetry. Hereunder are some extracts of the speech, which readers would cherish to r

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

16. Barack Obama, the President-elect of USA delivered one of the
finest speeches (extempore) on November 5, on winning the Presidential election.
It moved many with its sheer poetry. Hereunder are some extracts of the speech,
which readers would cherish to read.


Hello, Chicago ! If there is anyone out there who still
doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders
if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power
of our democracy, tonight is your answer. It’s the answer told by lines that
stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen, by
people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the first time in their
lives, because they believed that this time must be different, that their voices
could be that difference.

It’s the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor,
Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay,
straight, disabled and not disabled. Americans who sent a message to the world
that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red
States and blue States.

We are, and always will be, the United States of America.
It’s the answer that led those who’ve been told for so long by so many to be
cynical and fearful and doubtful about what we can achieve to put their hands on
the arc of history and bend it once toward the hope of a better day.

It’s been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we
did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to
America.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We
didn’t start with much money or many endorsements. It was built by working men
and women who dug into what little savings they had to give $ 5 and $ 10 and
$ 20 to the cause.

It drew strength from the not-so-young people who braved the
bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on doors of strangers, and from the
millions of Americans who volunteered and organised and proved that more than
two centuries later a government of the people, by the people, and for the
people has not perished from the Earth. This is your victory.

And I know you didn’t do this just to win an election. And I
know you didn’t do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of
the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the
challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our life-time — two
wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may
not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been
more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.

But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we
face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And, above all, I will
ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it’s been done
in America for 221 years — block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by
calloused hand.

What began 21 months ago in the depths of winter cannot end
on this autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only
the chance for us to make the change. And that cannot happen if we go back to
the way things were. It can’t happen without you, without a new spirit of
service, a new spirit of sacrifice.

Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our
nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from
the enduring power of our ideals : democracy, liberty, opportunity and
unyielding hope. That’s the true genius of America.

Yes we can change. America, we have come so far. We have seen
so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves — if
our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so
lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper,* what change will they see ? What
progress will we have made ?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment.
This is our time, to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity
for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim
the American dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth, that, out of many, we
are one; that while we breathe, we hope. And where we are met with cynicism and
doubts and those who tell us that we can’t, we will respond with that timeless
creed that sums up the spirit of a people : Yes, we can.



* Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old. In this election, she
touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in
America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how
America can change.

(Source : Livenint, 6-11-2008)

levitra

Penalties and prosecution under the Companies Act – Part 2

Laws and Business

1. Compounding of Offences :


1.1 In the last Issue we examined the penalties and
prosecution prescribed under the Companies Act, 1956. One of the remedies
against prosecution prescribed in the Act is ‘compounding of offences’.
For certain offences, compounding is possible, whereas for some other offences,
compounding is not possible. Compounding refers to a process whereby for an
offence in respect of which prosecution is launched against the
directors/officers, the authority only levies a monetary penalty. ‘Compounding’
is also known as ‘composition of offences’. ‘Composition’ means a compromise and
means condonation of an offence in exchange for money. In other words,
punishment and prosecution/imprisonment is converted into a fine. The Act
expressly deals with compounding in S. 621A.

1.2 S. 621A overrides anything contained in the Code of
Criminal Procedure. It applies to offences committed by a company or its
officers. In Usha (India) Ltd., In re, 85 Comp. Cases, 581 (CLB),
it was held that the presence of a non-obstante clause in S. 621A
overrides the Cr.PC. Thus, the jurisdiction granted to the CLB in regard to
compounding is independent of any provision in the Cr.PC. Even if a matter lay
before the High Court for quashing the criminal proceedings, it had nothing to
do with compounding. Compounding proceedings are independent of any criminal
proceedings for the same alleged offence.

However, two types of offences are not compoundable.
These are :

(a) For which the punishment is imprisonment only; and

(b) For which the punishment is imprisonment and
fine.

Thus, the Act deems these two types of offences as serious
and hence, no compounding is prescribed. In addition to the above two
categories, compounding cannot be done for a subsequent same offence committed
within 3 years. In other words, a repeat offence committed after 3 years of
compounding of the offence is treated as a new offence.

1.3 The sum payable for compounding cannot exceed the maximum
fine imposable.

2. Procedure :


2.1 The procedure for compounding is as follows :

(a) It can be done at any stage — before or after launch of
proceedings. There are several cases when after being issued ‘Show Cause’
notice companies voluntarily go in for compounding out of abundant caution to
buy peace and avoid litigation. Thus, like anticipatory bail, anticipatory
compounding is possible. Compounding of offences acts as a bar against
prosecution if it is done before the institution of the prosecution —
Reliance Industries Ltd., In re,
89 Comp. Cases 465 (CLB). It should
however, be borne in mind that the power to compound offences vested in the
CLB is a discretionary power — Ritesh Polyesters Ltd., 123 Comp. Cases
348 (CLB). Thus, it is not an automatic privilege granted by merely applying
for compounding. If a prosecution has
ended in a conviction and if the accused has ap-pealed against the punishment,
he may yet file a compounding application while the appeal is pending and if
he is successful, he would not have to suffer the sentence awarded —
Chottey Singh v. State of UP,
1980 Cr. LJ 583 (All).

(b) The appropriate authority for compounding is the
Company Law Board. However, in cases where the maximum fine does not exceed Rs.
50,000, the Regional Director is also empowered to compound. Thus, the RD can
only compound those offences where the punishment is only by way of a fine.
The Companies Amendment Act, 2002 proposes to substitute the appropriate
authority with the Central Government. However, the official date for this
change has not yet been notified.

(c) The application for compounding should be made to the
ROC who would then forward the same to the CLB/RD along with his comments. As
per Rule 20B of the Companies (Central Government’s General Rules and Forms,
1956) the application to the ROC should be made in e-Form 61.


The Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 state that an
application to CLB should be filed in Form No. 3 of the said Regulations. The
detailed application as per these Regulations should be attached to the e-Form
61. However, no such Form has been prescribed for an application to the RD.
The Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 do not state whether the Form should
be filed separately for each of the notices and hence, it is possible to file
a consolidated Form No. 3 for a company and all its directors/officers.

(d) Further, the Section also empowers the Court to
compound any offence which is compoundable by the CLB/RD. Further, while
allowing a compounding application, the Court has to follow the procedure laid
down under the Cr.PC. Thus, there is a concurrent jurisdiction for compounding
with the CLB and the Court. However, the procedure under Cr.PC laid down
u/s.621A(7) is not applicable when the compounding application is made before
the CLB. The CLB is not bound to follow any procedure, nor does it have to
obtain the permission of the Court at any stage. An appeal lies against its
order to the High Court. Thus, there is an option to a party to get
compounding done by the Criminal Court with the prior sanction of the Court or
get it done by the CLB without any prior permission and without following any
procedure — Hoffland Finance Ltd., In re, 90 Comp. Cases, 38 (CLB).
This view was also upheld by the Delhi High Court in the case of VLS
Finance Ltd. v. UOI,
123 Comp. Cases 433 (Del.) wherein it held the
compounding powers of the CLB u/s.621A(1) and of the Court u/s.621(7) are
parallel and one power is not dependent upon the other. The CLB can compound
even if the prosecution is pending in a Criminal Court.

(e) The compounding application should be in detail and
should lay down for each allegation — the facts, allegation and submissions.
Chartered Accountants are familiar with filing paper books before the ITAT and
they may use similar formats before the CLB.

2.2 In addition, the following guidelines issued by the DCA
are also relevant :


(a) The CLB/RD may ask for any officer to file a return or other documents within a specified time and non-compliance of this order is a punishable offence with fine of up to Rs.50,000 and/or a term of up to 6 months.

(b) More than one offence under one charging Section can be compounded at a time.

(c) In the case of a company, the composition fee shall be paid from its own funds while in the case of directors it shall be paid from director’s personal funds.

2.3 In the case of offences committed by a company fits directors when the company is under Court-approved liquidation, the DCA’s views as regards compounding applications are as follows:

a) There is no bar to any compounding application by the directors merely because the company is in winding-up.

b) Such compounding application for the directors does not require the prior approval of the Company Court.

c) However, compounding of proceedings against a company will not be permissible in view of S.446.

3. CLB’s order:

3.1 If the CLBdeems the case as fit for compounding, then it would pass an order to that effect. Some of the factors considered by the CLB include:

a) While compounding offences, it would consider the nature of the offence and the financial position of the company as well as the continuance of the default while determining the composition fee. It would ensure that having compounded the offence the same violation does not continue. It would also consider whether the application is an anticipatory one or in response to a prosecution being launched. In the case of Otto Burlingtons Mail Order P. Ltd., In re., 96 Comp. Cases, 525(CLB),the CLB considered all these factors while dealing with a compounding application for failure to obtain the Central Government’s approval u/s. 297. It observed that since the default was for several days, the penalty was large. Further, the offence was not a continuing one. Lastly,it was a voluntary application without fear of a prosecution. Hence, the CLB allowed the compounding application.

d) Similarly,in the case of First Leasing Co. of India Ltd., 42 SCL 65 (CLB), the application was allowed since the company had rectified the defaults u/s.211, u/s.217 and u/s.295, and had inadvertently committed the offences.

c) In a case where the company did not attach the balance sheet of the subsidiary along with the holding company due to non-finalisation of the subsidiary’s accounts and there was no willful omission, the CLB compounded the offence – Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd., (2000) CLC 2008 (CLB).

d) However, in the case of General Produce Company Ltd. In re, 81 Comp. Cases 570 (CLB), since the accounts were not filed, delay was not rectified, company’s registered address was incorrect, directors stated that they were not directors and yet they signed compounding applications, the CLB rejected the compounding applications.

e) In a violation u/s.297, the quantity of goods involved in contracts with interested directors was negligible and hence, compounding was allowed with going into the merits of the case – Dintex Dyechem Lid., 104 Comp. Cases 735 (CLB).

3.2 If the CLB does not pass a speaking and reasoned order, but merely permits the composition on payment of a fee, the question which arises is whether such an order can be challenged before the High Court as being bad in law. The Delhi High Court had an occasion to deal with such a matter in the case of VLS Finance Ltd. v. UOI, 123 Comp. Cases 433 (Del.) wherein it held the if the order indicates that the provisions of S. 621A were followed and if after being satisfied with the facts and circumstances, the CLB exercises the power vested in it by S. 621A, then merely because they have not given reasons for their conclusion, cannot be a ground for challenging the order.

3.3 Once compounding is done, either the prosecution cannot be launched or if it has been launched, it cannot be continued further and the accused is discharged. There is an automatic vacation of prosecution.

3.4 An appeal lies against the CLB’s order to the High Court. A shareholder is also entitled to file an appeal against the CLB’s order and it is not correct to say that he has no locus standi in such an order. He can file a complaint before a Court u/ s.621 regarding the offence and hence, he is also entitled to appeal against the CLB’s Order – VLS Finance Ltd. v. UOI, 123 Comp. Cases 433 (Del.).

4. Role of CAs:

4.1 Compounding is an avenue which companies should pursue to avoid litigation and prosecution. Chartered Accountants can play a very active role in guiding  their clients on the process and benefits of compounding.

Suggestions on Discussion Paper on ‘Issue of Shares for Concideration other than Cash’

fiogf49gjkf0d

Representation


Bombay Chartered Accountants’ Society


Discussion Paper issued by DIPP on

‘ISSUE OF SHARES FOR CONSIDERATION OTHER THAN CASH’

Representation by

BOMBAY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS’ SOCIETY

1. Background :


1.1 FEMA classifies transactions into two kinds — Current
Account Transactions and Capital Account Transactions.

1.2 Issue of shares by an Indian company to a non-resident is
classified as a Capital Account Transaction.

1.3 At present, FEMA permits non-cash consideration for issue
of shares by way of :


(i) a permissible Current Account Transaction (e.g., in
lieu of ‘royalty’); or

(ii) a permissible Capital Account Transaction (e.g.,
conversion of shares/securities, ECB, etc.).


2. Non-cash consideration — need of the
hour :


2.1 Two-way cash remittances involve the following financial
and non-financial costs :




v Transaction charges levied by the bank.



v With increased volatility in exchange rates, hedging costs are required to
be borne to mitigate the exchange fluctuation risk.


v Opportunity cost and
period cost arising from time delay in two-way remittance of the same
amount.




2.2 Hence, non-cash consideration is the need of the hour.

3. Premise of Representation :


This representation is based on the following premise.

3.1 No discrimination :


No discrimination should arise merely because the shares are
issued for non-cash consideration.

For instance, generally, a Current Account Transaction is not
required to be valued. Hence, such requirement should not be stipulated merely
because shares are issued for non-cash consideration.

3.2 Intangibles/Extraordinary Payments :


Proper valuation of intangibles/extraordinary payments may
pose substantial challenge, particularly at the regulatory end. Hence, non-cash
consideration by way of intangibles/extraordinary payments may be deferred till
acceptable norms for valuation of intangibles/extraordinary payments are
evolved.

3.3 Checks and Balances :


Proper system of adequate checks and balances should be
instituted to ensure against misuse. The system should ensure that where :




v income tax, customs duty, R & D Cess, etc. are payable, they are duly paid
before the shares are issued; and


v KYC norms or any such
compliances that are required to be done to protect against money laundering
possibilities, are properly done and supervised/recorded by the relevant
regulatory authorise.




4. Representation on Issues posed by DIPP :


4.1 S. 4.1(a) :


Does the issue of shares for considerations other than cash
represent a valid and unaddressed business need ? Should the Government amend
the FDI policy to address this need ? Will adoption of such an approach dilute
the objective of FDI policy by decelerating the flow of physical capital into
the country ?

Issue of shares for non-cash consideration is a business need
particularly because two-way cash remittances involve avoidable transaction
costs. Hence, FDI policy may be appropriately amended.

The objective of FDI policy should be to encourage
investments but not necessarily only by inflow of physical capital. The total
FDI can always be ascertained with proper reporting mechanism and adequate
checks and balances.

4.2 S. 4.1(b) :


Should the Government consider categories not covered under
extant policy for the issue of shares against considerations other than cash ?
Should such consideration be limited to the cases mentioned in S. 3 above or
should other categories also be added ? What regulatory safeguards should be
prescribed for each such case/category ?

To begin with, the categories mentioned in S. 3 should be
considered, and based on the experience as well as the perceived need, other
categories may be added.

The regulatory safeguard should ensure that the statutory
obligations (income tax, customs duty, R & D Cess, etc.) are fulfilled.

4.3 S. 4.1(c) :


Where allotment of shares for considerations other than cash
is permitted, should the Government be concerned with the valuation of shares ?
Should objective valuation of services/goods received as consideration for the
issue of shares be the prime concern in such cases and should it form the basis
for amendments to the FDI policy ? What are the guidelines that should be
adopted for listed/non-listed companies in such cases ? Can concerns relating to
valuation be effectively addressed elsewhere ?

Valuation norms as regards the shares should be the same,
irrespective of whether the shares are being issued for cash consideration or
for non-cash consideration.

Objective valuation of services/goods should be the concern
of the regulatory authority that normally deals with it. For instance, valuation
of imported goods is dealt with by Customs. Hence, that should be the authority
and FDI policy should provide for reliance on the valuation accepted by Customs.
As regards services, presently, no valuation norms are stipulated for
remittance. Hence, similarly, in case of issue of shares in lieu of services, no
norms for valuation of services should be applied.

Similarly, valuation norms for shares should be uniformly
followed, irrespective of whether the shares are issued for cash consideration
or for non-cash consideration.

4.4 S. 4.1(d) :


Should issue of shares to set off payment in the current
account/intangibles/one-time extraordinary payments be permitted ? Should the
broad
principle be adopted that whenever money has been received in India or value has
been received in India in lieu of money and valuation protocols are in place,
issue of shares may be permitted, with prior Government approval ?

As proper valuation of intangibles/extraordinary payments could pose challenge, non-cash consideration by way of intangibles/extraordinary payments may be deferred till acceptable norms for valuation of intangibles/extraordinary payments are evolved.

4.5 S. 4.1(e):
Is there a possibility that the issue of shares for non-cash considerations listed in S. 3 above could be misused, especially in the context of money laundering? If so, what steps should be taken to address such a contingency?

Proper system of adequate checks and balances should be instituted to ensure that where:

  • income tax, customs duty, R & D Cess, etc. are payable, they are duly paid before the shares are issued; and

  • KYC norms or any such compliances are required to be done to protect against money laundering possibilities, these are properly done and supervised/recorded by the relevant regulatory authorise.

India and China — A comparison

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. India and China — A comparison

The government simply has to find a way to deliver the
basics. That is what will defeat the Maoists and hold off China.

Tensions with China and the challenge posed by Maoists have
had their share of headlines these past few weeks. They are seemingly
unconnected issues, but they come into focus together when one looks at key
statistics on economic growth and human development. Take China first, for it
has acquired massive strategic advantage in terms of global economic impact,
diplomatic reach, military might and a hold on the world’s imagination because
it has performed spectacularly over three decades. Its economy has grown
10-fold since 1978, while its foreign trade has multiplied 70-fold in the last
decade alone; its exports are now more than India’s GDP. By way of comparison,
India’s GDP has multiplied about six-fold in the same period. It will take
India a full decade to reach China’s current level of per capita income. By
then, China will have overtaken the United States as the world’s largest
economy (calculated on the basis of purchasing power parity).

When it comes to human development indicators, the gap is
even greater. China’s human development index (calculated by the UNDP on the
basis of three factors — income, life expectancy and education) was 0.772 in
2007; India’s was 0.612, which was the level China had reached in 1990 ! At
the present rate of progress on the index (1.3% a year for India, about the
same as China’s), it will take two decades for India to get to where China is
today. As for economic development, China creates 10 times the power
generation capacity that India does in a year. Whichever indicator you choose,
China is one to two decades ahead of India, and on a rapid ascendancy curve.
Naturally, it will flex its muscles.

All this is history, and explains power disparities between
the two countries today. What of the future ? Some answers come in the World
Competitiveness Report, put out by the International Institute of Management
Development (IMD). Among 57 countries, China ranks 20th, India comes in 30th.
What is revealing is why India ranks so low. Of four primary factors, the
country does very well on economic performance (12th) and business efficiency
(11th). But on government efficiency it ranks 35th, and on infrastructure 57th
(i.e., last !). Go into the details and the rankings become even more
instructive : the last rank is on account of education, and health and
environment, while on business legislation India comes in 42nd. In other
words, the primary challenges are in areas where action is required most of
all from the government.

(Source : T. N. Ninan in Business Standard,
24-10-2009)

levitra

Stop consuming these medicines — Popular cold, pain drugs face ban

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Stop consuming these medicines — Popular cold, pain drugs
    face ban

Popular and widely-used medicines like phenylpropanolamine
or PPA (found in cough and cold remedies like Vicks Action-500, Solvin,
Wincold), gastrointestinal tegaserod (marketed as Ibsinorm, Tegod, Tegibs),
anti-bacterial gatifloxacin (Gaity) and painkiller nimesulide (Nice and
Nimulid) are under government scanner on concerns raised about their adverse
reactions. The drug technical advisory board (DTAB) will take a decision next
month to ban or restrict the usage of these and other drugs whose combined
market sales are pegged close to Rs.400-500 crore a year.

Other ‘controversial’ drugs, letrozole (used for
infertility treatment in women; letroz), emergency contraceptive drug
levonorgestrel (I-pill and Unwanted 72), and human placenta extract (Placentrex
lotion and gel sold by Albert David) will also be examined by the health
ministry. Besides taking a decision on banning certain drugs or restricting
the use of some, DTAB will examine next month whether emergency contraceptive
pills should be available over-the-counter (OTC) as reports of their misuse
are frequent. It will also take a decision on whether letrozole, approved for
use in breast cancer, should be used for infertility treatment or not, a
health ministry official told TOI.

Earlier this year, the DTAB banned anti-obesity drug,
rimonabant, on account of its serious side effects.

(Pending a formal ban, doctors should stop prescribing and
we should stop using these medicines)

(Source : The Times of India, 1-11-2009)

levitra

Security body sniffs at PN path to havens — Measures to Trace origin of funds thru PNs — NSC

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Security body sniffs at PN path to havens — Measures to
    Trace origin of funds thru PNs — NSC

The National Security Council Secretariat has called for
measures to trace the origin of inflows through participatory notes (PNs) and
entities registered in tax havens like Mauritius, Cyprus and Cayman Islands, a
move that can impact both portfolio flows and foreign direct investment (FDI).

Unchecked flow of funds through these routes could result
in country-specific restrictions being rendered useless, the council has
informed top guns in the government. If the traceability condition does not
materialise, the government should make prior government approval mandatory
for investment from all known tax havens, the Council has suggested.

This means that investment in sectors where 100% FDI is
allowed through the automatic route would also need approval from the Foreign
Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) if the government accepts the Council’s
suggestion.

In the case of PNs, the Council has called for more
disclosures since actual source of funds remains unknown even after extensive
investigation. There is also a need to distinguish investment by private funds
as compared to sovereign funds, the Council has said in a note, recommending
measures to step in security screening of FDI in view of increase in
cross-border terror attacks and escalation in money laundering.

PNs are used by overseas investors, who are not registered
with SEBI, to invest in the Indian market through registered foreign
institutional investors (FIIs). Despite recent efforts to discourage
investments through PNs, flows through this route continue.

Almost 44% of the equity FDI inflows into the country
originate from Mauritius while Cyprus accounts for nearly 2.93% of the FDI
flowing into India. Cayman Islands is the 12th largest source of FDI flows
into India, accounting for nearly 0.71% of the foreign investment into India.

The revenue department has also been objecting to FDI from
tax havens on grounds of ‘treaty shopping’ or use of these destinations to
route funds flows with the objective of gaining a tax advantage.

(Source : The Economic Times, 23-10-2009)

levitra

CVC for major penalty against 4 from CBEC and 3 from CBDT in August

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. CVC for major penalty against 4 from CBEC and 3 from CBDT
    in August

The Central Vigilance Commission disposed of 536 cases
during August 2009 referred to it for advice. The Commission advised
initiations of major penalty proceedings against 106 officers. Of these, 21
were from M/o Railways, 21 from public sector banks, 13 from MCD, 8 from
Northern Coalfields Ltd., 5 from Central Coalfields Ltd., 4 each from CBEC,
MHA & Ministry of Urban Development, 3 each from P.G. Institute of Medical
Education & CBDT, 2 each from D/o Telecommunications, Ministry of Labour and
ESIC. The remaining 7 cases pertained to different departments of the
Government of India and PSUs.

The Commission also advised imposition of major penalty
against 68 officers including 14 from National Aluminum Co. Ltd., 12 each from
Central Coalfileds Ltd. & Public Sector Banks, six from Ministry of Railways,
5 each from National Insurance Co. Ltd. & DDA, 2 each from Border Roads
Development Board & Central Board of Excise and Customs. Remaining 10 cases
pertained to different departments of the Government of India and PSUs.

On the Commission’s recommendations, the competent
authorities issued sanctions for prosecution against 20 officers including 16
from CBEC. Major penalty was imposed on 77 officers. These included 10 from
FCI, 9 from Ministry of Railways, 8 from New India Insurance Co. Ltd., 7 each
from Public Sector Banks & Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., 6 each from Department
of Telecommunications & ICAR, 5 from Eastern Coalfields Ltd., 3 each from DDA,
Council for Development Peoples & CBDT, 2 each from Central Warehousing Corp.
Ltd. & Ministry of Water Resources. The remaining 6 cases pertained to
different departments of the Govt. of India and PSUs.

Recoveries to the tune of Rs.29.15 crore were affected
after Commission conducted technical examination of some departments.

levitra

7,500 offshore tax evaders come clean

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. 7,500 offshore tax evaders come clean

Some 7,500 wealthy Americans turned over information about
hidden overseas assets, including some valued at more than $ 100 million,
ahead of a tax amnesty program’s deadline, the top US tax collector said. Doug
Shulman, commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, said his agency would
expand its crackdown on offshore tax evasion and will open new criminal
investigation offices in Beijing, Panama and Sydney, Australia. The amnesty
plan revealed accounts in 70 countries.

Under the amnesty program that began in September, tax
cheats can declare offshore accounts and income, pay reduced fines and, in
general, get immunity from criminal prosecution. The program turned up
undeclared offshore accounts ranging from $ 10,000 to more than $ 100 million.
At the heart of the US offshore tax effort is the government’s investigation
of UBS AG (UBSN.VX). The giant Swiss bank earlier this year settled a criminal
probe by paying $ 780 million and admitting it helped US citizens evade taxes.
In August, the bank agreed to turn over 4,450 names of clients with
undisclosed offshore accounts to end a related civil lawsuit.

Senator Carl Levin, a Democrat and chairman of the Senate
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has estimated the US loses $ 100
billion annually from international tax evasion. He questioned how many of the
individuals came forward without nudging from banks.

(Source : www.financialexpress.com, 20-10-2009)

levitra

Govt. readies biz vigilance system

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Govt. readies biz vigilance system

Having failed to detect the Satyam scam, the government has
embarked on a new vigilant system to track corporate frauds. As a part of
this, it has decided to look into companies whose financials are found to be
suspicious.

There will be several triggers to generate any suspicion on
the activities of a corporate. These include things like unusually high jump
in profits, suspect related party transactions, and huge amounts of unutilised
cash and bank balance, the official said.
Once a list of suspect companies is drawn up, these would be looked into by
the RDs and the RoCs who would look into their filings and financials further.

However, this would be a noninvasive document verification exercise, the
official said, pointing out that there was no intention of hounding the
corporate sector.

The technology-driven initiative comes as the government is
taking steps to further strengthen the MCA21 programme, which was initiated in
2006 and enables electronic filings, storage, retrieval, processing and
transmission of transactions, including incorporation of a company, and filing
of annual and statutory returns. The exercise to upgrade MCA21 has started,
ministry officials said.

(Note : Let us keep our fingers crossed & see how
the system actually works. People behind the system are more important than
the technology involved. Corruption can subvert any sophisticated & advanced
system.)

(Source : The Times of India, 27-10-2009)

levitra

PwC wants early Satyam settlement

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. PwC wants early Satyam settlement

Price Waterhouse, the Indian affiliate of global accounting
firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, has filed a consent application with capital
market regulator SEBI as part of an effort to reach an early settlement to the
ongoing investigation into the accounting fraud at Satyam Computers, renamed
as Mahindra Satyam, after the Mahindra group acquired the troubled company
earlier this year.

Price Waterhouse was the statutory auditor for Satyam
Computer, whose founder Ramalinga Raju confessed in January this year to
having fudged accounts to perpetrate a Rs.7,000-crore financial fraud. A probe
into the scam revealed that documents were forged to back fake bank deposits.

Price Waterhouse filed an application late last week in response to the show
cause notice that SEBI had issued in February 2009. This consent application
is in line with SEBI’s regulations and does not acknowledge Price Waterhouse’s
alleged wrongdoing in the Satyam fraud.

A Price Waterhouse spokesperson confirmed that the firm has
decided to pursue consent proceedings in relation to SEBI proceedings on the
audit of Satyam Computer Services rather than engage in a potentially long
drawn out legal proceedings with the regulator.

Under SEBI rules, after a consent application is filed,
representatives of SEBI meet up with the company to arrive at some sort of a
settlement, which could also include payment of a fine. After both parties
agree to a settlement, a high powered committee of SEBI passes a consent
order.

(Source : The Economic Times, 24-10-2009)

levitra

Rules under Information Technology Act notified

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Rules under Information Technology Act notified

The Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 has come
into force today. The Rules pertaining to S. 52 (Salary, Allowances and Other
Terms and Conditions of Service of Chairperson and Members), S. 54 (Procedure
for Investigation of Misbehaviour or Incapacity of Chairperson and Members),
S. 69 (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of
Information), S. 69A (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of
Information by Public), S. 69B (Procedure and safeguard for Monitoring and
Collecting Traffic Data or Information) and notification u/s.70B for
appointment of the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team have also been
notified.

With proliferation of information technology enabled
services such as e-governance, e-commerce and e-transactions; data security,
data privacy and implementation of security practices and procedures relating
to these applications of electronic communications have assumed greater
importance and they require harmonisation with the provisions of the
Information Technology Act. Further, protection of Critical Information
Infrastructure is pivotal to national security, economy, public health and
safety, thus it had become necessary to declare such infrastructure as
protected system, so as to restrict unauthorised access.

So, penal provisions were required to be included in the
Information Technology Act, 2000. Also, the Act needed to be
technology-neutral to provide for alternative technology of electronic
signature for bringing harmonisation with Model Law on Electronic Signatures
adopted by United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
Keeping in view the above, Government had introduced the Information
Technology (Amendment) Bill, 2006 in the Lok Sabha on 15th December 2006. Both
Houses of Parliament passed the Bill on 23rd December 2008. Subsequently the
Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 received the assent of President
on 5th February 2009 and was notified in the Gazette of India.

(Source : Internet & Media Reports, 28-10-2009)

levitra

New cyber law casts its net wide

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. New cyber law casts its net wide

The country’s cyber law has finally caught up with cyber
criminals. Eight months after it received presidential assent, the amended
Information Technology Act of 2008 came into force on October 27. The amended
Act has spread its net to tackle more offences, including cyber terrorism,
Wi-Fi hacking, sending and viewing child pornography, video voyeurism,
identity theft and even spam. But at the same time, it allows the government
to intercept information and snoop on its citizens. The original Act had
effectively just one criminal S. 66 for cyber crime and it was widely worded,
but vague. The new Act covers a range of crimes that attract punishment from a
three-year jail term to a life sentence.

Critics say the flip side is that it gives unfettered power
to the government to monitor all e-traffic. The information could be misused,
say cyber activists. The central government, though, says safeguards have been
put in place to check misuse.

(Source : The Times of India, 28-10-2009)

levitra

One-third of 80,000 public limited companies not filing annual returns

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. One-third of 80,000 public limited companies
    not filing annual returns

The Corporate Affairs Ministry said that around 30% of the
80,000 public limited companies are not filing their annual returns. The
Ministry has asked the Registrar of Companies (RoC) not to strike off the
names of companies by classifying them as defunct, even if they have not filed
their annual returns for three years. This is to find out if any of such
companies have committed violations of law.

The Ministry has developed an Early Warning System to find
out if any Satyam-like frauds are happening in any company. The Early Warning
would be sounded if a company’s profits show an absurd jump (that is, if they
exceed a certain threshold limit) or if companies cite absurd values regarding
their related party transactions. Besides, the warning would be sounded if a
company has huge cash balances remaining unutilised for several years, he
said. The official said the Ministry has asked RoCs and Regional Directors to
spread awareness about the advantages of getting a company listed. “Listed
companies have a better corporate profile and they have more borrowing
opportunities,” he said.

(It appears that the Authorities were sleeping all these
years — they acted only as filing clerks !)

(Source : Internet & Media Reports, 28-10-2009)

levitra

Changes to RTI Act will make it toothless

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. Changes to RTI Act will make it toothless

This is the second time in the past four years that the
Right to Information (RTI) Act, which has made a difference to the lives of
millions of ordinary people, is under the threat of becoming toothless.

This time around, the Centre has proposed several
amendments to the sunshine act, including denial of information about file
notings where decision is yet to be taken and adding clauses that allow a
public information officer (PIO) to deny information by deeming it as
frivolous or vexatious in nature.
Shailesh Gandhi, who is now the Central Information Commissioner, Delhi,
emphasised that the RTI Act must not be touched as its provisions empower
citizens to procure information without delay and harassment from state
officials. “Any kind of change will only cause confusion and it will be used
as a ploy by PIOs to deny information.’’

“The DoPT had proposed amendments such as defining
institutions which have substantial finance funding and even adding
sub-sections to S. 4 of the Act. S. 4 of the RTI Act empowers citizen to suo
moto inspect government files and documents and there is no need to add a
citizen charter to it. Similarly, quasi-government organisations and
charitable trusts partly funded by the government come within the ambit of the
RTI Act,’’ Gandhi said.

The RTI seminar was organised by the Bombay Chartered
Accountants’ Society (BCAS) along with Mahiti Adhikar Manch and Public Concern
for Governance Trust. About 50 RTI activists and citizens participated in a
discussion on future course of action to oppose these amendments.

(Source : The Times of India, 21-10-2009)

 

levitra

A buffet of wisdom

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

  1. A buffet of wisdom


Like the saying of some ancient Chinese, philosophers,
Warren Buffet’s worldly wisdom is deceptively simple and powerful in
application.

Buffet’s investments achievements are unparalleled. He owes
his success to hard work, integrity and that most elusive commodity of all —
common sense. Here are some of his smartest, funniest and very memorable
saying :


  • You can’t make a good deal with a bad person.



  • The fact that people are full of greed, fear or folly is predictable. The
    sequence is not predictable.



  • Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.



  • In
    looking for someone to hire, you look for three qualities : integrity,
    intelligence and energy. But the most important is integrity because if they
    don’t have that, the other two qualities are going to kill you.



  • With enough inside information and a million dollars you can go broke in a
    year.



  • It
    is easier to stay out of trouble than it is to get out of trouble.



  • You should invest your money in a business that even a fool can run, because
    someday a fool will !



(Source : From the book The Tao of Warren Buffett
by Mary Buffet and David Clark — quoted in ‘Fireside’ — The House magazine
of the Thermax Group Volume 39 No. 3 July-September, 2009)


levitra

Independence breach costs E&Y $ 2.9 million

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

23. Independence breach costs E&Y $ 2.9 million


Ernst & Young LLP agreed to pay more than $2.9 million to the
Securities and Exchange Commission to settle charges that it violated auditor
independence rules by co-producing a series of audio CDs with a man who was also
a director at three of E&Y’s audit clients.

According to the SEC, Ernst & Young collaborated with Mark C.
Thompson between 2002 and 2004 to produce a series of audio CDs called The Ernst
& Young Thought Leaders Series. The CDs featured E&Y partners interviewing CEOs
and CFOs in various different industry sectors, which the SEC says was part of
an effort by E&Y to promote its partners as experts in specific industries.

That relationship, said the SEC, violated independence rules
because Thompson was serving on the boards at several of E&Y’s clients during
the period when the CDs were produced. The SEC censured Ernst & Young and fined
the firm $ 2,918,987. It also censured partner John F. Ferraro for setting up
the relationship, and partner Michael G. Lutze for failing to alert one of his
audit clients — apparently Best Buy — after learning of the relationship. Lutze
was also suspended from practising before the commission for one year. The SEC
also issued a cease-and-desist order against Thompson. E&Y, Thompson, Ferraro,
and Lutze settled with the SEC without admitting or denying its findings in the
case.

Among the several reasons the SEC said the relationship did
violate independence rules was that fact that “unbeknownst to E&Y,” the
$ 377,500 that Thompson was paid for his work amounted to approximately half of
his net income at the time.

(Source : CFO.com US 7-8-2008)

levitra

UK to limit liability for audit firms as a result of Enron, but US declines to do so

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

22. UK to limit liability for audit firms as a result of Enron,
but US declines to do so


The UK is limiting its liability for audit firms because of
Enron, but the US does not want to do the same, arguably for the same reason.

The UK has won the battle in persuading government that
allowing auditor liability arrangements will serve the greater good in securing
a vital part of the profession which serves UK plc.

But it was a battle fought long and hard, mired with mistrust
of whether firms were exaggerating the risk, as well as outright annoyance that
the profession needed protecting in the first place.

In the UK, the good sense that prevailed over limiting
liability had much to do with the transparent approach of the UK firms, who went
out of their way after the Enron collapse to exhibit by way of
their financial statements the extent of the risk they faced in the event of
similar litigation.

Financial Reporting Council Chairman Paul Boyle said UK firms
generally had higher levels of transparency than their US counterparts, which
contributed to securing more support for limiting their liability. He suggested
that US firms reconsider
their stance.

One of the points they are arguing is that firms should not
publish their financial statements. There is a link here, which they might want
to think about, between them not wanting to publish these state-ments and the
lack of support for limiting liability.

The US firms may want to stick to private reports for now.

But if they want their proposals for limiting auditor
liability to be taken seriously, they should equally consider providing the
proof of the risk that they claim to face.

And if the risk is as serious as they say it is, it should
not be too hard to prove.

(Source : Internet, 12-9-2008)

levitra

China shuns Paulson’s free market — As US Treasury Secretary Plans $ 700-B Bailout

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

21. China shuns Paulson’s free market — As US Treasury Secretary
Plans $ 700-B Bailout


Eighteen months ago, US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told
an audience at the Shanghai Futures Exchange that China risked trillions of
dollars in lost economic potential unless it freed up its capital markets.

An open, competitive, and liberalised financial market can
effectively allocate scarce resources in a manner that promotes stability and
prosperity far better than governmental intervention,” Paulson said.

That advice rings hollow in China as Paulson plans a
$ 700-billlion rescue for US financial institutions and the Securities and
Exchange Commission bans short sales of Insurers, banks and securities firms.
Regulators in the fastest-growing major economy say they may ditch plans to
introduce derivatives, and some company bosses are rethinking US business
models.

“The US financial system was regarded as a model, and we
tried our best to copy whatever we could,” said Yu Yongding, a former adviser to
China’s central bank. “Suddenly we find our teacher is not that excellent, so
the next time when we’re designing our financial system we will use our own mind
more.”

(Source : The Economic Times, 25-9-2008)

levitra

Failed corporations under FBI lens

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

20. Failed corporations under FBI lens


The FBI has now opened preliminary investigations into
possible fraud involving the four giant corporations at the centre of the recent
turmoil — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers and the American
International Group, the Associated Press reported.

(Source : Business Standard, 25-9-2008)

levitra

Failed Superhero : Ineffective rescue acts of US in 100 years

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

18. Failed Superhero : Ineffective rescue acts of US in 100 years

The 1907 panic :

In October that year, a run on the knickerbocker Trust after
it failed to corner the market in United Copper shares caused panic on Wall
Street. Stocks plummeted, threatening major banks with failure. The calming
influence came not from the Fed — which did not exist — but from banker John
Pierpont Morgan, who organised a consortium of bankers to provide funds to prop
up banks and buy up stocks.

Great Depression, 1930s :

Some 9,000 banks failed after a stock market collapse
triggered severe restriction of credit, massive loan failures and ‘runs’ by
depositors to withdraw funds. President F. D. Roosevelt’s first act after his
1933 inauguration was to declare a 3-day bank holiday to cool things off. He
later signed into law the Glass-Steagall Act, creating Federal Deposit Insurance
Corp (FDIC), to restore depositors’ confidence in banks.

Commonwealth Bank, 1972 :

This was the first bank with over $ 1 billion in assets to be
bailed out. Being essential to Detroit’s inner city, so FDIC provided $ 36
million in loans — never to be repaid.

First Pennsylvania, 1980 :

Established in 1782 as one of the first US private banks,
First Penn was among many banks in the 1970s made insolvent by high deposit
interest rates that outstripped earnings from lower-yielding assets. It was
FDIC’s first large-scale bailout.

Continental Illinois, 1984 :

Once the seventh-largest US bank, Chicago-based Continental
Illinois National Bank and Trust was deemed ‘too big to fail’ and remains the
largest commercial bank taken over by the Fed and FDIC. The $ 40 billion-asset
bank became insolvent due to bad oil and gas exploration loans.

Bear Stearns, 2008 :

US Fed and treasury brokered a weekend deal for JPMorgan
Chase & Co to buy Bear Stearns at a rock-bottom price, with the Fed agreeing to
guarantee $ 29 billion in Bear Stearns assets taken on by JPMorgan.

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, 2008 :

The government seized control of mortgage finance firms
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to stabilise them after massive falls in their share
price made it impossible for them to raise needed capital to sustain mounting
mortgage losses.

AIG, 2008 :

Fed stepped in to rescue AIG, one of the world’s largest
insurers, with an $ 85 billion injection of taxpayer money. Under the deal, the
government will get a 79.9% stake in AIG.

(Source : The Times of India, 18-9-2008)

levitra

Audit firms found deficient during PCAOB inspections.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2

19. Audit firms found deficient during PCAOB inspections.


Audit firms that were found deficient during PCAOB
inspections usually accepted the way a client company accounted for sales in the
past, rather than checking for updates.

As U.S. and international accounting standard setters work to
fix, and then converge, rules related to revenue recognition, preparers and
auditors still struggle with proper real-world application of the regs. Indeed, during a meeting held in New York last week, a top official at the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board noted that revenue recognition issues
regularly trip up audit firms. Further, a new survey of senior finance executives concluded that revenue recognition is
one of the most complex and risky accounting issues of the day.

At the meeting, sponsored by the New York State Society of
Certified Public Accountants, revenue recognition topped the list of
deficiencies uncovered by the PCAOB in their inspections of audit firms, said
Paul Bijou, the Deputy Director of Inspection at PCAOB.

Bijou noted that in virtually every review performed by the
PCAOB, inspectors “see elements that audit work could be better” with regard to
revenue recognition.

Bijou said that trouble spots included the way auditors
assessed multi-element contracts, contracts that lead to revenue, revenue
‘cut-offs,’ and timing related to acceptance of product.

Bijou said that the PCAOB team once had a top-ten list of
“significant or frequent auditing or quality-control deficiencies” that it
culled from its five years of inspections. But this year, the list grew to 11
items. The areas are : revenue, related-party transactions, equity transactions,
business combinations and impairment of assets, going concern considerations,
loans and accounts receivable (including allowance accounts), service
organisations, use of other auditors, use of work prepared by specialists,
independence issues, and concurring partner review.

The survey, conducted by RevenueRecognition.com and IDC,
polled 586 senior finance executives, and found that 42% of the respondents
believe that revenue-recognition reporting causes the most errors and
inaccuracies in financial statements. Contract management, which gained only 14%
of the vote, came in second, with planning and budgeting (11%), and account
reconciliations (10%) rounding out the top four answers.

Thirty-five percent of the respondents thought that revenue-recognition reporting was the most complex corporate accounting process
to manage, while 57% asserted that revenue-recognition errors had the highest
level of materiality in financial-statement reporting.

(Source : Internet, 20-9-2008)

levitra

Smallwood v. Revenue and Customs Comrs (2010) EWCA Civ 778 (Court of Appeals)

Smallwood v. Revenue and Customs Comrs

(2010) EWCA Civ 778

(Court of Appeals)

Facts of the case:

This article is based on the judgment of the Court of Appeal of the UK. The case relates to capital gain earned by Mr. & Mrs. T. Smallwood (TS) during the tax year ended on 5th April 2001 (tax year comprised period 6th April 2000 to 5th April 2001). They were domiciled and residents of the UK.

In the year 1989, TS had made settlement for the benefit of himself and his family members (‘the Trust’). The Trust held certain assets, bulk of which comprised shares of two listed companies of the UK.

In April 2000, the trustee of the Trust was a Jersey company (L). The trustee was advised to dispose of the shares of listed UK companies which had appreciated considerably in value and to diversify the trust investment. Had the shares been sold by the Trustee directly, capital gain earned would have triggered significant taxation in the hands of the settlor (TS) in the UK. This is because the UK tax provisions permit taxation of income of a trust in the hands of the settlor if he himself happens to be a beneficiary of the trust.

As against the general provision permitting taxation of income in the hands of the settlor, the UK statute also has a provision which mandates assessment of trust income in the hands of the trustee if at any time during the tax year, the trustees are resident of the UK. As a result, the trust was advised ‘Round the World’ tax scheme by K, according to which (a) for part of the year, residence of its trustee was to be shifted to Mauritius (treaty favoured jurisdiction) by appointing a Mauritius-based corporate trustee (KM) in place of L, and (b) thereafter to be shifted to the UK before the end of the year by resignation of KM and appointment of LTS. This was to ensure that shares of UK companies were disposed of by the Trust while trustee was resident of Mauritius and therefore assessment in the name of the Trustee would permit the Trust to enjoy benefit of the UK-Mauritius treaty.

The following is the schematic description of the scheme.

In the return of income, TS claimed the capital gain on sale of shares as exempt, by claiming advantage of the DTAA between the UK and Mauritius.The claim was rejected by H.M. Revenue and Customs (HMRC), as a result of which the taxpayer appealed to the Special Commissioners.

The Special Commissioners held that residential test had to be applied for a given tax year. The Trust had dual residence and the tie-breaker test of Article 4(3) resolved in favour of the UK since Place of Effective Management (POEM) was in the UK. Factual finding and conclusion of the Special Commissioners were as follows:

    (i) POEM is not defined in the DTA; it is the place which is the centre of top-level management; that is, where the key management and commercial decisions are actually made.

    (ii) In this case the key decision was to dispose of all the shares in a tax-efficient way.

    (iii) The facts surrounding the appointment of KM leads one to the view that the real top-level management, or the realistic, positive management of the Trust, remained in the United Kingdom.

    (iv) It was a representative of K who approached KM and told them about the tax planning proposals and set out the basis of their appointment.

    (v) Although KM’s duties as trustee were laid down in legislation and in the trust deed and KM would only act within the context of what it was allowed to do, and the representative of KM stated on examination that the sale of the shares was not a condition for KM to accept the appointment as trustee and that the trustees only wished to receive appropriate advice and recommendations, nevertheless, it was also accepted by the representative that eventually as part of the tax planning exercise the shares would be sold at some time.

    (vii) All the actions of KM in Mauritius were carried out correctly and were properly documented. The appropriate meetings took place there and the necessary resolutions were passed. However, this merely meant that the administration of the Trust moved to Mauritius, but the ‘key’ decisions were made in the United Kingdom.

    (viii) The decision to sell the shares on the particular day was taken by the directors of KM at the telephone meeting; however, this only meant that if, for example, the price of the shares had fallen to a level as a result of which no gain would be realised on their disposal, the shares would not have been sold, but would have been retained and perhaps sold later. This was a lower-level management decision as there was no doubt that the shares would be sold; the real top-level management decisions, or the realistic, positive management decisions of the Trust, to dispose of all the shares in a tax efficient way, had already been, and continued to be, taken in the United Kingdom. The ‘key’ decisions were made in the United Kingdom.

    (ix) The state in which the real top-level management, or the realistic, positive management of the Trust, or the place where key management and commercial decisions that were necessary for the conduct of the Trust’s business were in substance made, and the place where the actions to be taken by the entity as a whole were, in fact, determined between 19 December 2000 and 2 March 2001, was in the UK.

On appeal by taxpayer to the High Court, the decision of Special Commissioners was reversed. The High Court adopted ‘snap-shot’ view of residential status and concluded as under at para 44:

    (i) The Commissioners erred in creating a simultaneous residence for the trustees.

    (ii) The correct analysis is that there were three periods of successive residence in the relevant UK tax year — Jersey, Mauritius and then the UK.

    (iii)    Article 13(4) gives the right to tax capital gains to the state in which there was residence at the time of the disposition.
    (iv)    That state was, at that date, Mauritius.
    (v)    Since there were no two jurisdictions vying for a claim of residence in that period, there is no tie for Article 4 to break.
    (vi)    Accordingly, Mauritius has the right to tax and the UK does not.

    The matter finally went to Court of Appeals. The Court, inter alia held (by majority) that on the primary facts which the Special Commissioners found, the POEM of the Trust was in the UK in the fiscal year in question. The scheme was devised in the UK by TS on the advice of K. The steps taken in the scheme were carefully orchestrated throughout from the UK. It was integral to the scheme that the trust should be exported to Mauritius for a brief temporary period only and then be returned, within the fiscal year, to the United Kingdom, which occurred. TS remained in the UK. There was a scheme of management of the trust which went above and beyond the day-to-day management exercised by the trustees for the time being, and the control of it was located in the UK.

    The Court of Appeal also adjudicated on a number of other issues. This Article is confined to treaty-related issue of POEM and does not deal with other issues which had an interplay of domestic law and treaty provisions.

    Inferences:

    From the judgment, the following inferences can be drawn:
 

  (i)    A formal resolution by board of directors does not establish that POEM is where the Board passes the resolution.
  
(ii)    The Board minutes are not conclusive as to where the POEM is.
 (iii)    If a scheme is devised at a particular place from where the steps in the scheme are orchestrated, it is that place where the scheme is devised/orchestrated is where the POEM is situated.
   
(iv)    Such scheme of management goes beyond the day-to-day management exercised by the Trustees for the time being and the control of it is located at a place where the scheme if devised. If a particular decision is taken in place ‘X’, then its implementation in other place ‘Y’ where the corporate trustee is situated does not make the other place the POEM. The POEM is situated where the key decisions are made.

    OECD/UN Commentaries:

    The OECD Commentary on Article 4(3), India’s observation to the OECD Commentary and the UN Commentary on A. 4(3) are reproduced below:

    OECD Commentary (2005) on Article 4(2):

    The place of effective management is the place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the entity’s business are in substance made. The place of effective management will ordinarily be the place where the most senior person or group of persons (for example a board of directors) makes its decisions, the place where the actions to be taken by the entity as a whole are determined; however, no definitive rule can be given and all relevant facts in these circumstances must be examined to determine the place of effective management.

    OECD Commentary (2008) on Article 4(3):

    “24. As a result of these considerations, the ‘place of effective management’ has been adopted as the preference criterion for persons other than individuals. The place of effective management is the place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the entity’s business as a whole are in substance made. All relevant facts and circumstances must be examined to determine the place of effective management. An entity may have more than one place of management, but it can have only one place of effective management at any one time.”

    India’s Observation to OECD Commentary on Article 4(3):
    “11. India does not adhere to the interpretation given in paragraph 24 that the place of effective management is the place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the entity’s business as a whole are in substance made. It is of the view that the place where the main and substantial activity of the entity is carried on is also to be taken into account when determining the place of effective management.”

    UN Commentary on Article 4(3):

    “10. It is understood that when establishing the “place of effective management”, circumstances which may, inter alia, be taken into account are the place where a company is actually managed and controlled, the place where the decision-making at the highest level on the important policies essential for the management of the company takes place, the place that plays a leading part in the management of a company from an economic and functional point of view and the place where the most important accounting books are kept.”

    Indian Perspective:

    The Indian perspective is explained separately for:
    (a)    the period up to 31st March 2012 (the last date up to which the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) will remain in force), and
    (b)    the period from 1st April 2012 (when the Direct Tax Code (DTC), assuming it will be enacted in the form in which the Bill is presented, will come into force).

    Income-tax Act, 1961:
    There is no definition of POEM in the Act. For the purposes of DTAAs, it has been held as follows by Tribunal/Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR):
    (i)    P. No. 10 of 1996, In re (1996) 224 ITR 473(AAR):
    In this case the Authority dealt with the issue of determining POEM for two companies. In the case of the first company, it was contended that the POEM is in Mauritius on account of the following facts:

            The company has two resident directors of appropriate calibre to exercise independence of mind and judgment.

  •             The company’s secretary is a resident in Mauritius;

  •             The registered office is in Mauritius;

  •             Banking transactions will be channelled through the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporations;

  •             Accounting records will be maintained in Mauritius in accordance with the Companies Act, 1984;

  •             Board meetings will be held in or chaired from Mauritius;

  •             All statutory records, such as minutes and members’ register, will be kept at the registered office;

  •             The company has an ordinary status.

    The Authority observed that it is difficult to say that the effective management of the affairs of the company is not in Mauritius in the above situation unless there are facts to at least prima facie indicate that such control emanates elsewhere than from Mauritius.

    In case of the second company, the Authority observed that the POEM of a company is the place where its board of directors takes the decisions; the position would remain the same even if the board would rely, to a considerable extent, on advisors if these advisors are not decision-taking bodies and regardless of the delegation, the company remains responsible for all decisions and acts of any delegate as if it has been done by itself.

    (ii) P. No. 9 of 1995, In re. (1996) 220 ITR 377(AAR)

    The Authority held that the word ‘Place of ef-fective management’ refers to place from where factually and effectively, the day-to-day affairs of the company are carried on and not to the place in which may reside the ultimate control of the company (shareholder).

    (iii)    DLJMB Mauritius Investment Co., In re (1997) 228 ITR 268 (AAR):

    The applicant contended that its place of effective management was situated in Mauritius under Article 4(3) of India-Mauritius Tax Treaty on account of the following facts:

  •             At least two directors of the company were resident in Mauritius and such directors had appropriate caliber to exercise independence of mind and judgment.

  •             The company secretary of the company was resident in Mauritius.

  •             The registered office of the company was in Mauritius.

  •             Banking transactions were channeled through an offshore bank account in Mauritius.

  •             Accounting records were maintained in Mauritius in accordance with the Mauritian Companies Act.

  •             Director’s meetings were held in Mauritius.

  •             All statutory records, such as minutes and members’ register were kept at registered office.

  •             The auditors were Mauritian residents.

  •             The company had a Mauritian custodian for its assets.

  •            The company was regulated by the Mauritius

    Offshore Business Activities Authority of Mauritius (MOBAA).

  •             The company was required to report on a quarterly basis its investments operations to MOBAA.
  •             The company was subject to such enactments and conditions as may from time-to-time be adopted Mauritian authorities in relation to investment funds, collective investment schemes and conduct of investment business.

  •             The company was incorporated for investment in Indian companies and investors from different jurisdictions were investing in the Mauritian company and directors in the company were appointed from different jurisdictions.
  •             Dividends were remitted from India to the Mauritian company.

    The Authority quoted the observations in P. No. 9 of 1995, In re (1996) 220 ITR 377 (AAR) [see(ii) above] and held that the said reasons were equally applicable. Accordingly, it held that the POEM of the applicant was in Mauritius. It did not comment on the aforesaid factors pointed out by the applicant.

    (iv)    Integrated Container Feeder Service v. JCIT, (96 ITD 371) (Mum.):

    The appellant, a shipping company incorporated in Mauritius and carrying on activity of operating ships in international traffic from India contended that its POEM was in Mauritius. The Tribunal observed that:

    The term ‘place of effective management’ has neither been defined in DTAA, nor defined in Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the said term should be understood in its natural meaning. It is plausible to say that the words ‘place of effective management’ refer to a place from where factually and effectively the day- to-day affairs of the company are managed and controlled and not to the place in which may reside the ultimate control of the company. In the context of the Company, it observed that it refers to a place where ships are put into service.

    It held that the company’s POEM was not in Mauritius on the following grounds:

  • No business activity was carried out in Mauritius.

  • The directors’ meetings were held in Mauritius only as a necessary formality to maintain its corporate status and to obtain tax residency certificate.
  •  The owners were from Dubai and entire business correspondence was made from Dubai.
  • Operating instructions were received only from Dubai.

  • The place of management was in UAE since all the staff, officers and captains were sitting in Dubai.

    The Tribunal observed that determination of the existence of effective management at a particular place is a question of fact which has to be determined according to facts of a particular case and that the certificate from Mauritian Authorities that the company’s POEM is in Mauritius is not sufficient.

    (v)    Saraswati Holding Corporation Ltd. v. DDIT, 16 SOT 535 (Del.):

    The appellant executed power of attorney in favour of Indian residents who conducted transactions through stock-brokers in India. The Assessing Officer held that the appellant had its POEM in India on the following grounds:

  •             The POA holders were in India; they were entitled to carry on activities on behalf of the appellant and that decisions regarding investments were taken by them.

  •             The share transactions were either concluded through one share-broker in India (V) who was managing investments of the appellant or through other brokers, in which case V was kept updated.

  •            The shares were being purchased and sold within a short span of three to four days and such decisions required close monitoring of the mood of the market.

    The Tribunal held that the reasons assigned by the Assessing Officer were insufficient to come to a conclusion that POEM of the appellant was in India. It observed that:

    The law is well settled that control and management of affairs does not mean the control and management of the day-to-day affairs of the business. The fact that discretion to conduct operations of business is given to some person in India would not be sufficient. The word ‘control and management of affairs’ refers to head and brain, which directs the affairs of policy, finance, disposal of profits and such other vital things consisting the general and corporate affairs of the company.

    It held that the place of effective management was not in India on account of the following reasons:

  •             The POA merely empowered the persons in India to conduct the day-to-day affairs of the company.

  •             Directions were issued by the two non-resident shareholders as evidenced by the telephone bills recording the calls made to India from time to time.

  •             The board of directors of the appellant had passed a resolution whereby the authority to take decisions was only with one of the two non-resident shareholders.

    (vi)    SMR Investments Ltd. v. DDIT, 2010 TII 66 ITAT Del-Intl:
    In this case, the orders for sale of shares held by the appellant were placed by a shareholder holding 99% of the shares in the appellant and who was a resident of India. The telephone calls were made from India. The appellant was asked to furnish the passport of the shareholder to verify whether the telephone calls were made from India or not. The passport was not furnished in spite of various opportunities. The AO held that it is the actual place of management of a company and not the place where it ought to manage and control the company that determines the POEM and accordingly he held that the appellant was resident of India. The appellant filed passport copies of a former director of the company and contended that from the passport it was clear that the director was in Mauritius on the dates on which the Board meetings of the Appellant were held. An affidavit of the director was also placed on record. Accordingly, the appellant indicated that the effective control was in Mauritius. The Revenue doubted the authenticity of the signatures. In view of this, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for examining the authenticity of the documents and deciding the issue afresh/ de novo. The facts and the Tribunal’s decision suggest that the Tribunal accepted that it was not the place where the orders were placed but the place where the board meetings were held that decided the POEM.

    DTC:

    The DTC Bill proposes to introduce a definition of POEM as follows:

    “(192) ‘place of effective management’ means —

    (i)    the place where the board of directors of the company or its executive directors, as the case may be, make their decisions; or
    (ii)    in a case where the board of directors routinely approve the commercial and strategic decisions made by the executive directors or officers of the company, the place where such executive directors or officers of the company perform their functions.”

    Summary:

    The OECD Commentary of 2008, specifically re-moves the reference to the board of directors. It reiterates the emphasis on the place where the decisions are made in substance. The UN Commentary provides for a number of circumstances to be taken into account for determining the POEM. It also uses the word ‘actually manage and control’ suggesting that it is the place of actual management which is relevant. The Commentary also states that the place that plays a leading part in the management of the company from economic and functional point of view is also a circumstance to be considered. It is not clear from this, whether the Commentary alludes to top management or the day-to-day management. It is also not clear as to how the place where the accounting books are kept could constitute a circumstance in deciding the POEM.

    5.2 So far as the judgment in Smallwood is concerned, it provides a useful guidance in inter-pretation of POEM, a concept which will acquire paramount significance in the DTC regime. A finer reading of the judgment reveals that the Court has accepted both OECD and UN Commentary’s (partly) understanding of concept of POEM. It has given weightage to the place where key and real topmost-level decisions were made in substance and held that place to be POEM. This place need not necessarily be the same place where Board meetings are conducted. In the Court’s view, the place where the whole tax planning scheme was orchestrated constituted the POEM.

    In the Indian context, the AAR/Tribunals have taken diverse views on the matter?: On the one hand it has been held that the place where the board of directors takes the decision is the POEM. On the other hand it is also been held that POEM refers to a place from where the day-to-day affairs of the company are managed and controlled. Again, factors other than the directors e.g., Company Secretary, Registered Office, etc. have also been considered to hold that the POEM was in Mauritius. Further, the Tribunal has held that the POEM refers to the place where all the employees were based and from where the revenue generating assets (ships) are put in service. In that case, the Tribunal went behind the Board meetings.

    It appears that:

    (a)    the POEM is at the place where the key man-agement decisions are actually taken. This is also supported by the dictionary meaning of the word ‘effective’ as ‘existing in fact, actual’ (www.thefreedictionary.com) and ‘real’ [see Worley Persons Services Pty. Ltd., In re (2009) 312 ITR 273 (AAR) interpreting ‘effectively connected’].

  

(b)    the place where the day-to-day affairs of the company are carried on does not constitute its POEM;
   
(c)    the factors such as company secretary, regis-tered office may not be relevant in the overall scheme of determination of POEM;
 
  (d)    the POEM is not necessarily at a place where the employees are based;
   
(e)    ordinarily it is the place where the board meet-ings are held is the POEM. However, this is a rebuttable presumption. If facts reveal that key management decisions are really or are actually taken at a place other than the place where board meetings are held and the board merely follows instruction or works within the framework provided by other person, then the POEM will lie at a place from where such other person instructs;
  
(f)    for the above, the onus would be on the Tax Department to prove that POEM lies at a place other than the place where board meetings are held. Some facts which may be relevant in deciding whether POEM lies at the place where the Board meetings are held or at some other place are:
   
(i)    Minutes of board meeting: Whether minutes provide evidence of elaborate discussion at the time of passing a particular resolution;
 
  (ii)    Composite of directors on the board:
    Their reputation, qualification, experience, attendance in board meetings, etc.
   
(iii)    Documentation of commercial rationale behind taking a particular decision.
   
(iv)    Residency of directors. If meeting are held through audio/video conferencing reason for their physical absence.
    (v)    Power of Attorney (POA) under which some functions of Board are delegated: Whether such POA is under the authority of the board and there are sufficient checks and control whereby actions taken by the attorney holder are monitored and controlled.

Suggestions on the draft Point of Taxation (for services provided or received in India) Rules, 2010

fiogf49gjkf0d

Representation

4th
November, 2010


To,

The Chairman,
Central Board of Excise & Customs,
Department of Revenue,
Ministry of Finance & Company Affairs,
North Block,
New Delhi-110001.

Dear
Sir,


Subject
: Suggestions on the draft Point of Taxation (for services provided or received
in India) Rules, 2010



The Bombay Chartered Accountants’ Society (BCAS) is a voluntary organisation established on 6th July 1949. BCAS has about 8,000 members from all over the country at present and is a principle-centred and learning-oriented organisation promoting quality service and excellence in the profession of Chartered Accountancy and is a catalyst for bringing out better and more effective Government policies & laws and for clean and efficient administration and governance. We make representations regularly on Direct and Indirect Taxes.

Please find attached suggestions on the draft Point of Taxation (for services provided or received in India) Rules, 2010 (‘Rules’).

Thanking you,

Yours truly,

For Bombay Chartered Accountants’ Society

Mayur B. Nayak    
President 

Govind G. Goyal
Chairman Indirect Taxes & Allied Laws Committee

Encl : Suggestions

Bombay Chartered Accountants’
Society

Suggestions on the draft
Point of Taxation (for services provided or received in India) Rules, 2010
(‘Rules’)

Rules to be restricted only
for the purpose of ascertaining the date for determination of rate of service
tax and not for altering the time for payment of service tax from the present
receipt basis to accrual/invoice basis/receipt whichever is earlier.

1. The Point of Taxation
(for Services Provided or Received in India) Rules, 2010 (‘Rules’) are sought to
be issued in exercise of the powers conferred on the Government of India u/s.
94(2)(hhh) of the Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘Act’), which is the law governing service tax.

2. The purposes of the draft
rules as stated in the preamble are :

    (i) To introduce clarity and certainty as to the date from which a new service would become payable

    (ii) To provide for the above in the context of continuous supply of services

    (iii) To link the liability to pay tax to provision of service, raising of the invoice or receipt of payment for service provided or to be provided, whichever is the earliest

    (iv) To bring the service tax law in line with Central Excise Laws and VAT laws; and

    (v) To smoothen transition to GST.

3. However, an important
point to be noted is that the Point of Taxation (for Services Provided or
Received in India) Rules, 2010 are sought to be issued pursuant to S. 94(2)(hhh)
which is dealing with ‘the date for determination of rate of service tax and the
place of provision of taxable services’. Hence in the present context, the Rules
must confine themselves primarily to prescribing the date for determination of
the rate of service tax whenever there are changes in the rate of service tax.

It cannot legally entrench
into other areas such as linking the liability to pay tax to provision of
service, raising of the invoice or receipt of payment for service provided or to
be provided, whichever is earliest or imposition of service tax on new services.
These areas would be outside the legal scope of S. 94(2)(hhh) of the Act.

4. Secondly, the charge of
service tax is on the value of ‘taxable services’. S. 65(105) defines ‘taxable
service’ as ‘any service provided or to be provided’ to ‘any person’, ‘client’,
‘customer’, etc. Thus, S. 65(105) which defines ‘taxable services’ covers — (a)
services ‘provided’; and (b) services agreed ‘to be provided’ within the ambit
of service tax. The intention is to collect tax when advance payments are
received for services to be provided. Thus, service tax would be payable even on
advances received. Thus, the taxable events would be two :

(a) a service provided;
and

(b) a service agreed to be
provided.

‘Taxable event’ with regard to services ‘provided’ is identified by the time of provision of the service and with regard to services ‘to be provided’ is identified by time of payment towards value of service to be provided. This has a significant bearing on the rate of tax. Thus where there has been a provision of services but no monies towards the value of services have been received, the rate of tax prevailing at the time of provision of services would apply. Similarly, in cases where monies have been received towards the value of services but the services are yet to be provided, the rate of tax prevailing at the time of receipt of payment towards the value of services would apply. These propositions are implicit in the law [S. 65(105), S. 66 & S. 67] and the Service Tax Rules, 1994 (Rule 6). The Rules sought to be notified must not alter these provisions but must make them explicit. Thus the relevant date for the purpose of determination of rate of tax would be the ‘date of provision of service’ or ‘the date of receipt of money, whichever is earlier. This is the present understanding.

5.    Thirdly, it would be better not to disturb the existing arrangement of paying service tax when monies for taxable services provided or to be provided are received. The changeover from the present dispensation which allows payment of tax on receipt of the payment (including advances) to a system where tax is paid to the Central Govern-ment on provision of service, raising of the invoice or receipt of payment for service provided or to be provided, whichever is earliest would involve several issues :

(i)    Changes in the Act to provide for the taxable event at the time of supply as in the UK. VAT law.

(ii)    Change in Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994.

(iii)    Changes in Cenvat Credit Rules,2004 which allow credit of input services only when they are paid.

(iv)    Further, there are no provisions relating to bad debt adjustment or reduction in the invoices in case monies are not received or monies are received less as compared to the invoice amount. Hence the service providers would have to pay tax even on monies not received. Thus, the service provider would be out of pocket if they have to pay service tax on invoices issued but the monies for the service are not received.

(v)    The payment of tax upon issue of invoices without having received the payment would mean that the tax would have to be financed by internal accruals or borrowings which in most cases would be difficult for service providers.

(vi)    The provision of service is quite different compared to sale/manufacture of a product. Firstly, services are intangible unlike goods where the sale/clearance of a product is verifiable physically by delivery challans, transport documents, etc. In case of services the delivery of a service cannot be verified. Out of the three events — (i) provision of services; (ii) issue of invoice and (iii) receipt of payment, the last event viz., receipt of payment is historically and factually verifiable by the Department with a greater degree of certainty. Secondly, the service provider may not have a lien on the service unlike in case of goods.

There are no documents of title to services which can be put through the bank and hence the recoverability is suspect. The rights of an unpaid seller of goods are well guarded and recognised in law as against the rights of an unpaid service provider. Hence it may not be correct to equate goods and services. Thirdly, in case of Central Excise law and VAT law, the tax is not payable on advances. Thus, the purpose of the Rules viz., to bring the service tax law in line with Excise law and VAT law is not achieved nor is it necessary.

(vii)    Further there will be several issues when there is a transition from payment of service tax on receipt basis to/payment of service tax on provision of service, raising of the invoice or receipt of payment for service provided or to be provided, whichever is earliest. There would be several system and software issues. This needs to be avoided.

In this regard, it has to be appreciated that the payment of service tax on receipt of money towards provision of services was in vogue since 1998 and has worked quite well mainly due to its simplicity and more importantly, since it provides a more factually verifiable basis for the Department to collect service tax.

6.    In view of the above, it is submitted that the Rules must confine themselves only to provide for the date for determination of rate of service tax.

7.    Accordingly, a suggested draft of the Rules centred around carrying out the objective viz. prescribing the date for determination of rate of service tax is attached herewith marked Annexure A. Basically, the suggested draft revolves around an important maxim that the rate of service tax would be the ‘date of provision of service or receipt of payment of money for services, whichever is earlier’.

Other suggestions:

8.    In Rule 6 of the draft Rules, it has been provided that where the payment has been made before the date of introduction of service tax on a service, no tax shall be payable to the extent of payment received. In our view, this provision must be made by way of an exemption notification and cannot find place in the proposed Rules.

9.    A closely related issue is with regard to determination of value where invoiced amount is in foreign currency. In such cases, the Service tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 must be amended to provide that the rate of exchange applicable shall be the rate prevailing on the ‘date of provision of service or receipt of payment of money for services, whichever is earlier’.

Draft of Service Tax (Determination of the Rate of Tax) Rules, 2010
 
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (hhh)    of Ss.(2) of S. 94 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules, namely:

Short-title and commencement:

1.    (1) These Rules shall be called the Service Tax (Determination of the rate of tax) Rules, 2010.

(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

 

Definitions:

2.    In these Rules, unless the context otherwise requires:

(a)    ‘Act’ means the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994);

(b)    ‘continuous supply of service’ means any service which is provided, or to be provided, under a contract, for a period exceeding one year and for a consideration the whole or part of which is determined periodically and includes any service which the Central Government, by a Notification, prescribes to be a continuous supply of service, whether or not subject to any condition;

(c)    ‘Invoice’ shall have the meaning assigned to it in Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and shall include any bill or challan as prescribed therein;

(d)    Words and expressions not defined in these Rules but defined in the Act or the Rules made thereunder shall have the meanings, in-sofar as maybe, assigned to them in the Act or the Rules made thereunder.

Date for determining the rate of service tax:

3.    For the purposes of ascertaining the date for determining the rate of service tax, the following provisions shall apply, namely:

(a)    where the service has been provided and no payment has been received, the rate of service tax shall be the rate prevailing on the date when the services are provided and if for any reason date of provision of services is not determinable, the date of receipt of money towards the service provided or to be provided shall be date for determining the rate of service tax.

(b)    If, before the provision of service, the service provider receives a payment in respect of the service to be provided, the rate of service tax shall be the rate prevailing on the date of payment to the extent covered by the payment.

Explanation: An interest-free refundable deposit shall not be considered as a ‘receipt of payment in respect of the service to be provided’. However, if the terms of the contract provide that such interest-free refundable deposit is adjustable against the consideration payable by the service receiver, then the date of adjustment shall be considered as the date of receipt of payment.

Continuous supply of service:

4.    In case of continuous supply of services, where the whole or part of the value is determined or payable periodically or from time to time, the rate of service tax shall be the rate prevailing at the following times:

(i)    If the date of payment is prescribed in the contract, the date on which the payment is liable to be made by the service receiver, irrespective of whether or not any invoice has been raised or any payment received by the service provider;

(ii)    If the payment is to be made on the completion of an event, the time of completion of that event;

(iii)    If the date of payment is not prescribed in the contract, each time when the service provider receives the payment, or issues an invoice, whichever is earlier.

Provided that the clauses (i) to (iii) shall be applied sequentially for the purposes of this rule.

Explanation: Where service tax is payable as a service recipient the date of issue of invoice has to be understood as date of receipt of invoice by the service recipient.

Associated enterprises:

5.    The rate of tax in respect of transactions between associated enterprises shall be the rate prevailing on the date on which the payment has been made, or the date of debit or credit in books of accounts, or issuance of invoice, whichever is earlier.

Explanation: Where service tax is payable as a service recipient the date of ‘issuance of invoice’ has to be understood as date of receipt of invoice by the service recipient.

Royalties and similar payments:

6.    In respect of royalties and similar payments, where the whole amount of the consideration for the provision of service was not ascertainable at the time when the service was performed, and subsequently the use or the benefit of this service by a person other than the supplier gives rise to any payment of consideration, the rate of service tax shall be the rate prevailing:

(i)    each time that a payment in respect of such use or the benefit is received by the provider; or

(ii)    an invoice is issued by the provider, whichever is earlier.

BCAS/MBN/40    November 9, 2010

To
The Concerned Officer,
Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB),
Government of India,
New Delhi-110001

Dear Sir,

Subject : Submission of Representation on Issue of Shares for Consideration other than Cash

We are pleased to submit our considered represen-tation on the aspects of Foreign Direct Investments with regard to Issue of shares for Consideration other than Cash.

We hope that the same would be useful and would find your favour.

Please feel free to contact us for any further clarification or explanation in the matter.

We shall be pleased to assist you in framing a pragmatic policy on Foreign Direct Investment.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

Mayur B. Nayak
President

Limitation of Benefits Articles – Concept and its Application in Indian Tax Treaties

1. Introduction :

1.1 While making cross-border investments, a tax-payer usually looks forward to, among others, the following objectives :

 

(a) protection against double taxation;

(b) achieving certainty in respect of quantum of tax liability, including withholding taxes;

(c) a tax-efficient structure; and

(d) hassle-free tax regulatory environment.

 

1.2 For achieving the above objectives, many a time appropriate tax treaties are used. Taking advantage of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between two countries by a resident of third country is known as treaty shopping.

Of late, the tax authorities have expressed apprehensions on misuse of tax treaties, whether by way of treaty shopping or otherwise. As a result of the problems created by treaty shopping, strong views are expressed that a tax treaty should not facilitate tax avoidance and therefore, the common practice of treaty shopping should be restrained by incorporating various safeguards.

1.3 There has been a conscious attempt on the part of various countries to incorporate the concept of ‘Limitation of Benefits’ (LOB) in tax treaties, to ensure that their tax base is not eroded by foreign companies taking advantage of tax treaty network by way of treaty shopping, etc. Thus, the concept of LOB assumes lot of significance while studying and interpreting the international tax treaties.

1.4 The Supreme Court (SC) in Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan, (263 ITR 706), observed as under :

 

“. . . . if it was intended that the national of a third state should be precluded from the benefits of Double Taxation Avoidance Convention, then a suitable term of limitation to that effect should have been incorporated therein . . . . The appellants rightly contend that in the absence of a limitation clause, such as the one contained in Article 24 of the Indo-U.S. Treaty, there are no disabling or disentitling conditions under the Indo-Mauritius Treaty prohibiting the resident of third nation from deriving benefits thereunder . . . . .”

 

Thus, the SC decision in Azadi Bachao appears to be a catalyst for India to take note and insist on the LOB clause in its tax treaties.

2. Meaning and Concept of Limitation of Benefits :

2.1 The terms ‘Limitation on Benefits’ or ‘Limitation of Benefits’ or ‘Limitation of Relief’ as are used in tax treaties, are generally not defined under the international tax treaties. At times, the relevant Articles/Clauses may not also be titled as such. The LOB provisions are intended to prevent treaty shopping, whereby an entity can be established without any economic connection, so that access can be had and thereby the benefits of treaty obtained. The LOB prevents treaty shopping and thus tax avoidance by denying treaty benefits to unintended beneficiaries who channel their investments through entities formed in a treaty country without being the resident thereof. The concept underlying such a provision is that a contracting state should accord treaty benefits only if the recipient of income has sufficient nexus with the other contracting state.

2.2 The IBFD International Tax Glossary defines the term ‘Limitation on Benefits Provision’ as under :

 

“Provision which may be included in a tax treaty to prevent treaty shopping e.g., through the use of a conduit company. Such provisions may limit benefits to companies which have a certain minimum level of local ownership (‘look-through approach’), deny benefits to companies which benefit from a privileged tax regime (‘exclusion approach’) or which are not subject to tax in respect of the income in question (‘subject-to-tax approach’), or which pay on more than a certain proportion of the income in tax-deductible form (‘channel approach’ or ‘base erosion rule’) . . . .”

 

2.3 From the above definition, it is apparent that LOB provisions are included in the tax treaties mainly to put restriction on availment of treaty benefits by a conduit company or an entity formed for the purposes of treaty shopping. However, the concept of LOB could also include the following :

(a) Look-through approach : Such provisions may limit benefits to companies which have certain minimum level of local ownership. Treaty benefit may be denied to a company not owned, directly or indirectly by residents of a state of which the company is resident.

(b) Subject-to-tax approach : Such provision may deny benefits to companies which are not subject to tax in respect of the income in question in the state of residence. Treaty benefits in the state of source are granted if the income in question is subject to tax.

(c) Channel approach : The provisions may deny benefits to companies which pay more than a certain percentage of the income in tax-deductible form to non-qualified entities. The treaty benefits could be denied if substantial interest in the company is owned by the residents of a third country and more than 50% of the income is used to satisfy claims by such persons.

(d) Exclusion approach : Such provisions may include denying treaty benefits (such as dividends, interest or capital gains) to specific type of companies enjoying tax privileges in the state of residence.

(e) Specific condition to be fulfilled with respect to exemption from particular category of income e.g., the Protocol to the India–Singapore DTAA provides for specific condition to be fulfilled by an entity for claiming exemption from capital gains tax in the source country.

(f) Specific LOB Articles dealing in general with conduit entities or treaty shopping or entities attempting to claim double non-taxation e.g., Indian DTAAs with countries such as UAE, Namibia, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia contain specific LOB Articles dealing in general with the treaty shopping or double non-taxation.

(g)OECD Model Convention in Article 10(2)(a) relating to concessional rate of tax on dividends in case of companies, provides for beneficial ownership of the minimum threshold percentage of the capital of the company paying the dividends. Many DTAAs entered into by India contain such clauses with varying threshold limits. Similarly, the interest and royalties and fees for Technical Services Articles restrict the benefit of lower rate of tax provided in those articles to only ‘beneficial owner’ of the respective incomes.

3. LOB Articles in the Model Conventions:

3.1 The OECD and UN Model Conventions do not contain separate Article in respect of LOB clause.

However, Commentary on OECD Model Tax Convention, July, 2008 update in para 20 on page 54, under Commentary on Article 1 provides as under:

“20. Whilst the preceding paragraphs identify different approaches to deal with conduit situations, each of them deals with a particular aspect of the problem commonly referred to as ‘treaty shopping’. States wishing to address the issue in a comprehensive way may want to consider the following example of detailed limitation-of-benefits provisions aimed at preventing persons who are not resident of either contracting states from accessing the benefits of a Convention through the use of an entity that would otherwise qualify as a resident of one of these states, keeping in mind that adaptations may be necessary and that many states prefer other approaches to deal with treaty  shopping:………..”

Thus, in para 20 of Commentary on Article I, the OECD has given example of detailed limitation of benefits provisions, which the states may adopt.

3.2 Article 22 of the United States Model Income-tax Convention of November 15,2006 contains separate article in respect of limitation on benefits. United States Model Technical Explanation accompanying the United States Model Income-tax Convention of November IS, 2006 gives detailed explanation and examples in respect of LOB Article. The reader would greatly benefit by going through the said explanation and examples in this regard. Article 24 of the India-US DTAA contains the provisions relating to limitation on benefits.

4. LOB Clauses in Indian Tax Treaties:

4.1 At present 8 DTAAs entered into by India with Armenia, Iceland, Namibia, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, USA and UAE contain separate articles in respect of LOB.

In addition, India’s recent treaties with Mexico (signed on September, 10, 2007) and Luxemburg (signed on June 2, 2008) contain LOB Articles, although both the treaties are yet to be notified by the Government of India.

4.2 The text of the relevant LOB Articles in the above-mentioned 8 DTAAs, is given below for ready reference .


Conclusion:

From the above, it is clearly evident that the significance of articles relating to Limitation of Benefits clause cannot be undermined. All concerned parties would need to pay specific attention to LOB clauses in India’s Tax treaties. India is increasingly including Limitation of Benefits clause in the new treaties and in some cases including the same in the existing treaties by renegotiating existing treaties through the protocols as in the cases of Singapore and UAE. A taxpayer would be well advised to look for and examine relevant LOB clauses very minutely before taking any decisions ‘in relation to the relevant DTAAs.

Representation on Compounding Procedures and Sums

fiogf49gjkf0d

Representation

Representation


Bombay Chartered Accountants’ Society
7, Jolly Bhavan No. 2, New Marine Lines,
Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.


The Chamber of Tax Consultants
3, Rewa Chambers, Ground Floor,
31, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020.

   

Honourable Governor,
Reserve Bank of India.
Dr. D. Subbarao, Central Office,
Mumbai-400001.

 

Date
: 27th October, 2009

Respected Sir,

Re : Our Meeting on 21st October 2009 with CGM.Compounding
Procedures and Sums.



This is to sincerely thank you for the patient hearing granted
by Shri Salim Gangadharan, Chief General Manager on 21st October 2009. We had
a free and frank exchange of views.


We appreciate the opportunity granted to us to suggest and
submit proposal to alleviate hardships and at the same time achieve RBI’s
objectives.

We will prepare a proposal for compounding policies and
procedures including amnesty proposal. Two cases of injustice to the
applicants have been discussed. More than the events, the policy approaches
which have caused injustice need to be identified and reviewed.

We will also submit our proposals on some of the Master
Circulars, cases of difference between Government view and RBI view; and
related matters.

With warm regards,

Yours sincerely,

For Bombay Chartered
Accountants’ Society
Mr. Ameet Patel

President

For The Chamber of Tax Consultants
Mr. K. Gopal
President


Copies with compliments to :
Deputy Governor, Chief General Manager, and Chief General Manager MRO.


levitra

Tax Due Diligence — Indirect Taxes

M & A

After reading the series of
articles of ‘Financial and accounting due diligence’ and Tax due diligence —
direct tax
, readers would be clear about the circumstances under which due
diligence exercise is performed and its objectives. In the context of mergers
and acquisitions, due diligence is mandated either by a vendor who intends to
divest stake in a particular business/unit or by the potential acquirer who
intends to acquire the subject business/unit. The objective, in both the cases,
is common i.e., to avoid any post-transaction unpleasant surprises.

In terms of process of
performing indirect tax due diligence, it is no different from the manner in
which it has been discussed in the earlier articles on financial, accounting and
direct tax due diligence. In fact, the process should be so integrally linked
that it should appear seamless to the target and the client management.

Need for indirect tax due
diligence :

As the words ‘indirect tax’
suggest, these taxes are not a direct hit to the person who has the statutory
obligation to pay these taxes since these are recoverable in nature. However,
the indirect tax-related exposure, whether emerging from pending litigation or
from a potential exposure identified during the course of due diligence, remains
and/or travels with the subject-business.

This is one of the prominent
distinctions between direct tax and indirect tax i.e., the indirect
tax-related risks in terms of statutory liabilities and obligations are largely
associated with the business, irrespective of the manner in which the business
changes the ownership; say, by slump-sale or by transfer of equity or by sale of
merely the manufacturing unit or service centre or a particular branch, etc.
Thus, unlike income-tax where generally the statutory obligations remain with
the transferor entity, in the case of a business transfer, the indirect tax
obligations travel with the business. Hence, identifying and analysing indirect
tax obligations pertaining to the subject-business remain key focus areas as
discussed below.

Incidentally, it would be
important to also define in the scope of work with the client as to which
indirect taxes are being covered by the indirect tax diligence and which other
taxes/duties are excluded, say, that are expected to be covered by the legal due
diligence. Generally, custom duties, excise duties, sales tax, VAT and service
tax are covered in an indirect tax due diligence and taxes such as stamp duties
are picked up by the legal due diligence team.

Key focus areas :

One may broadly examine the
indirect tax diligence through eight key focus areas viz. :

1. Pending litigations and contingent liabilities :

    This is one of the most common and traditional method of commencing the tax due diligence work. Here, the issues involved initially need to be studied from source documents, say, notices, demand orders and appeal papers made available along with interaction with the management and/or their tax advisors. The next step is to undertake research based on legal provisions, notifications, clarifications and judicial precedents found relevant. This leads to the third and important step involving merit analysis of the issue involved after considering the contentions of both the parties to the dispute and the result of indigenous research work along with tax positions adopted by industry members. Copies of legal opinion obtained should be reviewed with developments subsequent to the date of the opinion.

    It is generally accepted that unlike tax advisors/advocates who are attending to the tax disputes, the diligence team does not have the luxury to take significant amount of time to analyse the issue. Needless to say, the expectations are always there for the diligence team to arrive at an independent and conclusive view on each of the issues involved. Hence, greater focus should be applied on providing ‘substance’ rather than ‘form’ in terms of detailed articulation of arguments of both sides before arriving at the view. For example, in media industry, specifically in production and distribution segment, one of the issues that is under litigation is VAT liability and the state in which such liability to pay VAT arises on transfer of distribution and various broadcasting rights in the content (say, film, television serial, event, etc.). Companies are known to take different positions, ranging from a conservative stand to execute the agreement in the state where the business of the media company resides and pay VAT as applicable in that state, to a more aggressive stand where the agreements are executed outside India or in any of the Indian states where VAT is not applicable or exempted.

    Mere merit analysis of the disputed issues does not complete the exercise. What helps in achieving completion is understanding the accounting treatment in the books/financial statements i.e., the extent to which the amount is paid, provided as liability or disclosed as contingent liability. Even in case of payment, it would be relevant to ascertain the extent to which the amount paid under protest is accounted as a ‘receivable’ or charged to revenue. In case of industry engaged in export of services, say, IT and ITES industries, typically companies account for service tax and excise duty paid on input services, input and capital goods as a receivable, though the time the Tax Department generally takes in accepting the company’s contention, processing the refund claim and granting a refund is such that the possibility of receiving refund in the near future appears remote.

    It is also important to note that the analysis should not be restricted to the disputed period. If the issue involved is ‘recurring’ in nature, the aggregate exposure needs to be quantified including the potential exposure for periods subsequent to the dispute if there is no change in the provision of law and adopted tax position. The two long-ranging disputes that come to mind are applicability of service tax and/or VAT on (i) construction and sale of residential/commercial premises, and (ii) licensing of software/copyrights. These issues are perennially being faced by the construction & real-estate and IT & media industries, respectively.


2.    Observations in completed assessments and audits:

Completed assessment orders and audit memos provide opportunity to observe the acceptance or otherwise of the critical tax positions taken by the company. Tax positions include exemptions, abatements, incentives, reliefs, set-off claims, etc. claimed the company.

It may be noted that even though the assessments and/or audit memos finally do not result in any litigation, it is important to observe any disallowance or rejection of tax relief claimed which resulted into demand, which in turn have been accepted and paid by the company. These observations form the basis for analysing the tax positions in open assessments. At times, companies have been known to claim the benefit of inter-state sales at concessional tax rate against declarations in Form C, etc. in the return, but the collection and furnishing of these forms are not pursued aggressively until assessment (which generally takes after a period of three years or more) and results in some differential tax liability along with interest and penalty, when assessments are concluded. Hence, based on past trend of the company in completed assessments, the potential liability, if observed on this account, needs to be indicated.

3.    Potential issues in open/unassessed periods:

The best way to tap the open assessment periods is to peruse the tax returns and filings including VAT Audit reports. However, it is not practical to peruse all the tax returns, payments and filings done say on monthly basis for excise, VAT and service tax for each of the locations where the indirect tax registration has been obtained. This needs to be done judiciously on sample basis.

The focus here should be applied on the tax claims and tax positions not yet tested in the assessments/audits. On a case-to-case basis, if the stake involved in adopted tax positions is significant, focussed interaction with management is desired to know the rationale and compliance to conditions for taking such positions. When found relevant, key customer contracts and/or vendor contracts may be perused on sample basis. This helps in gathering some comfort about tax positions adopted in the open assessment period which carries higher element of uncertain risk as compared to the risk in the matters already under litigation.

4.    Positions vis-à-vis industry issues:

At times, it would be difficult to argue that merely because many/most players in the industry have adopted the same practice, the tax position would be acceptable. However, one cannot afford to ignore this altogether. It is because, there have been instances in the past where mere clarifications to the provisions of law (which otherwise is deemed to have been effective with retrospective effect) have been articulated in the Departmental circular or clarification so as to implement prospectively by providing relief for the past in indirect manner. The one example I recollect here is about clarifications on service tax liability in the case of international roaming under various scenarios of inbound and outbound roaming which provided some relief to telecom operators for the positions taken in historical period. This has happened generally when the issue involved is an ‘industry issue’ and contended on bonafideness. Thus, providing information on industry positions provides different level of business comfort.

5.    Tax incentives — eligibility, admissibility, fulfilment of terms, conditions & obligations and continuity:

Tax incentives, specifically area-based tax incentives (say, available to manufacturing units in Uttaranchal, Himachal, Kutch, North Eastern States, etc. and/or to units in Special Economic Zone, Electronic Software/Hardware Technology Park and/ or to units in specified backward areas in States for VAT incentives, etc.) are subject to complying with specified terms and conditions. In this regard, it is important to gauge the continuity of tax incentives post transaction. This is because the quantum of unused tax incentives and its entitlement play a vital role in valuation of the transaction and hence its fate.

When the transaction structure is known at the time of due diligence, it is appreciated if the things found critical for continuation of tax benefits post transaction are briefly but appropriately communicated along with major concerns and listing of broader compliance steps for continuation.

6.    Tax balances — perusal of reconciliation statement:

Understanding the quantum of tax balances accounted as ‘income’ (e.g., tax incentives/refunds), ‘expense’ (e.g., tax paid during audit observations), ‘assets’ (e.g., tax paid under protest and tax credit balance) and ‘liabilities’ (e.g., provision for periodical tax amount and for tax disputes) is important. It is because at the end of the due diligence exercise, one needs to identify the appropriateness of their accounting and the impact on profitability, net-worth and working capital.

After seeking reconciliation of tax balances, attention here needs to be paid on the rationale/ justification for each of the items forming part of the reconciliation statement. Post analysis, the resultant adjustments in terms of computation of profitability, net-worth, working capital, etc. should be identified and reported. The illustrative list of such adjustments includes (i) service tax refund for export of services, VAT refund for export, export incentives like duty drawbacks, etc. though entitled, not actually claimed before the appropriate authorities and accounted as ‘income’ and ‘receivable’, should be highlighted (ii) VAT/CST, etc. for March payable in April not accounted as ‘expense’ and ‘liability’ in the accounts for financial year, should be highlighted.

7.    Related-party transactions:

Transactions with related party(ies) desire twofold attention i.e., (i) when the provision of law (say governing excise duty and VAT in some states), require transactions between related parties to be at fair market value, and (ii) when the provision of law is silent (say, service tax law or VAT in some states).

In the first scenario, the potential exposure should be identified. While in the second case, it needs to be understood that if the proposed transaction is structured in such a way that the benefit of ‘related party’ may not continue post transaction (say, where only one of the related entities is proposed to be acquired and hence the concessional transaction value regime shall come to an end in commercial terms). In such situations, the consequential tax implications need to be identified, analysed and discussed.

8.    Important compliance procedures:

Verifying and reporting compliance matters is generally outside the work scope of due diligence as they generally do not give birth to any deal-breaker or significant valuation/risk issue. Besides, this requires greater amount of time and cost which always are constraints. However, understanding and providing broad flavour of tax compliance management (in terms of tax filings, tax payments, withholding tax on payment to works contract, etc.), tax team (in terms of qualification, level of competencies, etc.) and related systems (say, to undertake tax computations, to monitor collection of declaration forms, etc.) helps the client specifically in transactions envisaging change of management whether partially or completely.

In this regard, the indirect tax team would be well advised to clearly state the ‘exclusions’ from the scope of work of the indirect tax diligence so that there are no gaps in client expectations. Normally exclusions from an indirect tax diligence are review of tax compliance/procedural matters, providing tax advisory/planning services, etc.

Reporting:

Reporting is very critical to the entire exercise. Without adequate and smart reporting, the due diligence exercise may prove futile. While discussing the key issues, it needs to be ensured that though the approach and substance should suggest advisory role, the form in which the report is articulated should in no way appear as advisory deliverable like tax memo or opinion. The reason is obvious; the primary intention is not to repair the potential issue but to understand the worth and implications of the issues correctly.

For the foregoing reasons, the report is generally divided into three parts i.e.:

(i)    Key issues (i.e., ‘must to know’ issues involving significant implications on the financial state-ments based on historical issue or from future perspective (say, continuity of tax incentives in special industrial areas, view on high-value litigation matters, etc.)

(ii)    Other issues (involving non-key but ‘need to know’ issues) and

(iii)    Informative issues (i.e., help in understanding overview of business from indirect tax perspective).

It is important to note that when the key issues could be in the nature of potential deal-breakers, there is no formal or structured way to communicate them for the first time during the diligence exercise. It means, such deal-breakers must be communicated ‘as and when’ they are observed without waiting for due date.

For each of the issues explained in the report, it must cover, inter alia, the exposure period, the quantum of exposure along with interest and mandatory penalty. When the penalty is not mandatory, a broad range should be indicated. Each issue needs to be analysed on merit by classifying risk as ‘probable’, ‘possible’ or ‘remote’ with agreed weightage for valuation adjustments, say for arriving normalised earnings, net-worth and/or working capital.

Lastly, reporting the issues without mitigation a strategy may leave the client clueless. Hence, it is equally important to provide a risk mitigation strat-egy in terms of obtaining warranty/indemnity, or in making a valuation adjustment, or deferring a part of the consideration in escrow account, etc. till a more definitive resolution of the issues concerned.

Conclusion:

It may be said that though there may not be a standard error-proof approach for carrying out a relatively subjective exercise of due diligence under different circumstances, the foregoing should help practitioners in carrying out an indirect tax due diligence exercise in a more structured manner to bring out the value to the client along with building efficiency and superior risk management to the whole diligence process.

A misperception at times amongst clients and their advisors is that indirect tax does not have the same flamboyance as a direct tax or a legal issue which then dangerously leads to a lack of adequate focus by the client on the unresolved indirect tax issues. We, indirect tax practitioners are well aware of the unending complexities of the indirect tax acts, rules, notifications and clarifications in our country and the multitude of judicial interpretations. And I humbly submit that a majority of my fellow direct and indirect tax practitioners would also acknowledge that more often than not, the potential tax liability arising from an indirect tax issue can be far more crippling than any other demand!

It remains the responsibility of the indirect tax team to correct any such misperceptions of the client or his advisors about ‘indirect tax’ and to ensure that the client has a true and fair appreciation of the indirect tax issues in the proposed M&A transaction.

Can Chartered Accountants be Punished by SEBI ?

fiogf49gjkf0d

Securities Laws

The issues are:


    (a) Are auditors governed only by ICAI as far as their auditing and certification is concerned?

    (b) Whether SEBI has the right to take action against the auditors, and if so under what circumstances?





These important issues have been recently answered by the
Bombay High Court in Price Waterhouse & Co. v. SEBI, [(2010) 103 SCL 96 (Bom.)].
As we will see later herein, the Court decided against the petitioners. However,
the Court stayed the proceedings for four weeks to allow filing of a special
leave petition to the Supreme Court. As of the date of writing this article, the
status of whether such a SLP has been filed or not is not known.

The issue is whether the work of an auditor should be judged
only by an expert body — that is — ICAI — an institution established under a
statute. It is a matter of serious concern if the same work is also scrutinised
by another authority that may reach a different conclusion and this also results
in multiple actions/
proceedings.

There is also another important reason to be concerned.
Chartered Accountants generally and even as Statutory Auditors are not required
to be ‘registered’ with SEBI. SEBI closely controls registered intermediaries
not only through the process of registration and suspension/cancellation of
registration, but also by closely regulating them through Rules and Regulations.
If SEBI can control and act against unregistered intermediaries, particularly if
they are regulated by another body, it would be a worrisome precedent for not
just chartered accountants, but any person having anything to do with listed
companies or capital markets.

Further, the anxiety is also because the type of action that
the SEBI Act permits is quite wide-ranging and the show-cause notice (‘the SCN’)
that SEBI issued in this matter showed this. The SCN pointed out several actions
that SEBI considered taking, assuming that the allegations were proved. For
example, it said: it would consider banning the auditors from carrying out
statutory audit or other audit/certification of not just listed companies, but
of any other intermediary, etc. registered with SEBI. It would also ban the CA
from ‘accessing the securities markets’ (though it is not clear how a CA may
access it) and certain related actions. It would even initiate prosecution that
may entail a fine of up to Rs.25 crores and imprisonment up to 10 years.

Thus, to summarise, the result would be multiple authorities
judging the auditor, resulting into multiple action and consequences.

It is to be clarified that the SCN was challenged on the
issue of the jurisdiction of SEBI to initiate action. There was no finding of
facts and the Court merely held that it is up to SEBI to investigate the actual
facts and first establish the allegations. But the Court also held that:



  • SEBI does have the power to investigate an auditor with regard to professional
    work done for listed companies and certain other specified persons.



  • Secondly, if the investigation established the allegations as true, then the
    actions of banning, etc. were permissible. In short, the Court held that the
    ICAI did not have exclusive jurisdiction over a CA with regard to the
    professional work done by them for such entities.



  • Thirdly, SEBI and ICAI operated from different angles and thus their
    jurisdictions are simultaneous but not really overlapping.


The issue arose out of the Satyam Computers episode where
several accounting and related frauds have been alleged and are as widely
reported, backed also by an email by Mr. Raju. The issue relating to the role of
the auditors arose as to whether there was any failure/deficiency in the
performance of their professional duties and/or whether there was connivance.

Now let us review the decision in a little more detail.

SEBI issued a show-cause notice to the auditors and certain
other parties. It alleged that in respect of the various alleged accounting
frauds including showing higher revenue, profits, assets, etc., the auditors and
other specified persons did not perform their professional work properly. It
thus asked these parties to explain their stand and said that if the
explanations were not found satisfactory, then it may take actions such as
banning the parties from carrying out audit, etc. of listed companies and
registered intermediaries, accessing capital markets, etc. It even stated that
prosecution may also be considered.

The parties raised a preliminary issue that since they were
Chartered Accountants carrying out professional work and since their
professional work was sought to be judged, they should be judged by the ICAI
only and SEBI had no jurisdiction.

SEBI, however, stated that auditors of listed companies were
entities associated with the capital market and since SEBI’s role was to protect
the integrity of capital markets, it had the right to take action against
persons associated with capital markets. Hence, SEBI has the jurisdiction.

Various issues were raised and it is worth running through
how the Court dealt with them.

The fundamental question is whether SEBI has jurisdiction
over Chartered Accountants or whether the ICAI has exclusive jurisdiction which
SEBI cannot encroach on? The Court raised the issue: (emphasis supplied in all
extracts of the decision in this article):

“However, it is required to be examined as to whether in substance by initiating the proceedings under the SEBI Act, the SEBI is trying to overreach or encroach upon the power conferred under the CA Act.”

“Looking to the provisions of the SEBI Act and the Regulations framed thereunder, in our view, it cannot be said that in a given case if there is material against any Chartered Accountant to the effect that he was instrumental in preparing false and fabricated accounts, SEBI has absolutely no power to take any remedial or preventive measures in such a case. It cannot be said that SEBI cannot give appropriate directions in safe-guarding the interest of investors of a listed company. Whether such directions and orders are required to be issued or not is a matter of inquiry. In our view, the jurisdiction of SEBI would also depend upon the evidence which is available during such inquiry. It is true, as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners, that SEBI cannot regulate the profession of a Chartered Accountant. This proposition cannot be disputed in any manner. It is required to be noted that by taking remedial and preventive measures in the interest of investors and for regulating the securities market, if any steps are taken by SEBI, it can never be said that it is regulating the profession of the Chartered Accountant. So far as listed companies are concerned, the SEBI has all the powers under the Act and the Regulations to take all remedial and protective measures to safeguard the interest of investors and the securities market. So far as the role of Auditors is concerned, it is a very important role under the Companies Act.”

Further, the Court reviewed the Chartered Accountants Act and the powers therein and did not find any contradiction. Since SEBI was not really seeking to regulate the profession of Chartered Accountants, the Chartered Accountants Act could not prevent SEBI from taking action of the nature proposed in the SCN.

Can SEBI order that an auditor shall be prohibited from auditing the accounts of a listed company? This is what the Court held:
“It is not uncommon nowadays that for financial gains, even small investors are investing money in the share market. Mr. Ravi Kadam has rightly pointed out that there are cases where even retired persons are investing their retiral dues in the purchase of shares and ultimately, if such a person is defrauded, he will be totally ruined and may be put in a situation where his life savings are wiped out. With a view to safeguard the interests of such investors, in our view, it is the duty of the SEBI to see that maximum care is required to be taken to protect the interest of such investors so that they may not be subjected to any fraud or cheating in the matter of their investments in the securities market. Normally, an investor invests his money by considering the financial health of the company and in order to find out the same, one would naturally bank upon the accounts and balance- sheets of the company. If it is unearthed during inquiry before SEBI that a particular Chartered Accountant, in connivance and in collusion with the Officers/ Directors of the company has concocted false accounts, in our view, there is no reason as to why to protect the interests of investors and regulate the securities market, such a person cannot be prevented from dealing with the auditing of such a public listed company. In our view, the SEBI has got inherent powers to take all ancillary steps to safeguard the interest of investors and securities market. The powers conferred under various provisions of the Act are wide enough to cover such an eventuality and it cannot be given any restrictive meaning as suggested by the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is the statutory duty of the SEBI to see that the interests of the investors are protected and remedial and preventive measures are required to be taken in this behalf. It is required to be noted that in the instant case the inquiry is still pending, ultimately the decision is required to be taken by SEBI on the basis of available evidence on record. However, in order to determine the jurisdiction of SEBI, the contents of the show-cause notice which is the first step of initiating proceedings are required to be seen. Reading the contents of the show-cause notices and the relevant statutory provisions, it cannot be said that SEBI has no jurisdiction at all to enquire into the affairs of the petitioners insofar as it relates to Satyam.”

The Court made it clear that SEBI definitely has jurisdiction in such matters by observing, “In our view, it cannot be said that the show -cause notices issued by SEBI are, on the face of it, not sustainable on the ground that SEBI has no jurisdiction to enter into the affairs of the petitioners or that it lacks jurisdiction to go into such questions.”

A critical question that often arises is who are persons associated with the securities markets since that would give jurisdiction to SEBI to inquire and take action. Thus, the question is whether auditors are such persons associated with the securities market. The Court answered in the positive, stating, “even though the petitioners may not have direct association in share market activities, yet the statutory duty regarding auditing the accounts of the company and preparation of balance-sheets may have a direct bearing in connection with interest of the investors and the stability of the securities market. In our view, the petitioners in their capacity as auditors of the company Satyam, which was at one point of time considered to be a blue chip company who had a defining influence on the securities market, can be said to be persons associated with the securities market within the meaning of the provisions of the said Act.”

The Court also held that the power of SEBI is over and above the provisions of S. 227 of the Companies Act, 1956, which provided for removal of an auditor. Thus, it negatived the contention that removal of auditor can only be u/s.227. The Court also compared the powers under SEBI Act with the powers under the Consumer Protection Act and said that neither of this can be said to be encroaching on the powers of ICAI. The Court also rejected the argument that such proposed action by SEBI would amount to infringement of fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.

Interestingly, the Court held that the criteria for determining proper performance of duties by the auditors were the very audit norms prescribed by ICAI. The Court, observed, “However, if it is found in a given case that the Chartered Accountant has violated the audit norms prescribed by the Institute under the CA Act, the SEBI can certainly consider the said aspect in order to find out as to whether such a professional person should be allowed to continue to function as an Auditor of a listed company if by continuing such person as an Auditor of a listed company, it may hamper the interest of the investors of such a listed company.”

An interesting aspect is whether SEBI would have jurisdiction only when there is a mala fide intention or connivance by the auditors or whether professional negligence without such an active involvement is also covered. It is not clear from the decision, but the Court did make some interesting observations. An example of such an observation of the Court is:

“In a given case, if ultimately it is found that there was only some omission without any mens rea or connivance with anyone in any manner, naturally on the basis of such evidence the SEBI cannot give any further directions.”

Another thought that comes to the author is: whether the views of ICAI should have been taken here in some manner, since at least indirectly the issue related to the exclusive jurisdiction of ICAI.

Open offer pricing — recent decisions

fiogf49gjkf0d

Securities Laws

(1) Open offers under the SEBI Takeover Regulations are
perhaps the rare situations in which intelligent investor interest focusses on
the wording and interpretation of securities laws. Whether there will be an open
offer and at what price and to whom are
questions, the answer to which present quick money-making opportunities to them.
In Western countries, professional arbitrageurs used to specialise in this
narrow field and some of them made hundreds of millions of dollars. As many of
these investors resorted to the use of inside information, this rewarding
activity came into disrepute.

(2) Even a simple takeover can create complications for an
intelligent and well-informed investor if he speculates. The issue gets further
complicated if takeover of Company C by B is quickly followed by takeover of B
by A.

(3) A recent decision of the Securities Appellate Tribunal
deals with just some of such complications and should present interesting
reading. The issue essentially related to what offer price should be given to
public shareholders under the mandatory open offer required under the Takeover
Regulations. The interesting aspect was that the company taken over itself
controlled another listed company (that was itself recently taken over). You can
picture the situation that a big fish eats a small fish and before the small
fish is even digested by the big fish, a bigger fish comes and eats the big
fish !

(4) Since the law requires that if a company is taken over
indirectly, then open offer is required for the indirectly acquired company
also. The question was what would be the price that should be offered for such
indirectly acquired company’s public shareholders. The case considers the
complexities that arise in such takeovers and how the law would be
expectedly found to be partially inadequate. The case also offers insights how
the Appellate Authority tries to find a meaningful solution to the issue,
filling in gaps through a ‘purposive’ approach to interpretation of the law. The
issue also is whether the Securities Appellate Tribunal, with due respect, took
an approach that gave benefits to public shareholders, but that was not
justified by the letter and perhaps even the spirit of the law.

(5) Let us go into the facts of this interesting case. The
decision is in the case of Dr. Jayaram Chigurupati v. SEBI and Others,
(Appeal No. 137 of 2009). The 3 companies involved were Zenotech Laboratories
Limited (‘Zenotech’), Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited (‘Ranbaxy’) and Daiichi
Sankyo Company (‘Daiichi’).

(6) Zenotech was the small fish in our analogy and was taken
over by Ranbaxy in the first instance. Ranbaxy made the required open offer to
the shareholders of Zenotech. Thereafter, Zenotech became a subsidiary of
Ranbaxy. Within a few months of the open offer by Ranbaxy — Ranbaxy itself was
taken over by Daiichi and thereafter became a subsidiary of Daiichi. It needs to
be noted that both Zenotech and Ranbaxy are listed companies.

(7) To recap the law, the Takeover Regulations require that
if a listed company is taken over, an open offer is required to be made to the
public shareholders of the listed company. The objective is that when an
acquirer buys shares typically from the Promoters of a Company, he should offer
to buy out at least some of the public shareholders too. The minimum percentage
for which the public offer has to be made is 20% of the equity capital. The
important other relevant factor crucial to the present case is the price at
which such an open offer has to be made. The offer price is determined by a
formula that takes into account the price paid for the initial acquisition, the
average of the prices for the preceding specified period, the price paid by the
acquirer or persons acting in concert with him in the preceding specified period
and so on.

(8) The Takeover Regulations require that if there is an
‘indirect’ takeover, the open offer would be required not only to the public
shareholders of the company taken over, but also of the company indirectly taken
over. The subsidiary company of the company taken over is a classic example of a
company indirectly taken over. In the context of our above example, Ranbaxy was
the company directly taken over by Daiichi and Zenotech was the company
indirectly taken over since Zenotech was a subsidiary of Daiichi.

(9) Thus, Daiichi would have to make an open offer not only
to the shareholders of Ranbaxy, but also to the shareholders of Zenotech. The
open offer to Ranbaxy’s shareholders did not offer any complication and was not
also in dispute here. Complications arose for the open offer of Zenotech and at
what price should the open offer be made to their public shareholders.

(10) A brief digression is required here to explain why the
law in relation to such indirect acquisition is a bit complicated and why it has
certain artificial parameters. Earlier, the differences in reality that may
arise between direct and indirect takeovers were not realised and hence the law
was not much different. However, experience made the lawmakers realise that
indirect takeovers had to be treated differently. It was seen that often
indirect takeovers were proposed but could not be completed because certain
approvals were not eventually received. This was particularly so in case of
cross-border acquisitions and where the parent company abroad was acquired.
Approvals of competition authorities and others made the completion of the
takeover uncertain and at least there was a significant delay involved. If an
open offer is required to be made for a takeover that finally does not happen,
then the shares so acquired would be an undue cost to the acquirer. For these
and other reasons, the law in India was amended and it was provided, in essence,
that in case of indirect takeovers, the open offer would have to be made within
3 months completion and consummation of the takeover of the first company.
However, to be fair to the public shareholders, the price to be offered to them
would be the higher of the prices calculated with reference to the original date
of the takeover of the first company and the date when the open offer is
triggered after the completion of the takeover of the first company.

(a) Thus, the complicated formula would have to be applied
with reference to both such dates.

(11) An interesting parameter provided for in this formula is
that if at any time during the preceding twenty-six weeks, the acquirer or any
person acting in concert with him had acquired shares at a higher price, then
such higher price would have to be offered to the public shareholders. The logic
is not far to see — the law intends to ensure that the highest of the prices
recently paid by the acquirer or persons acting in concert should be paid to the
public shareholders.

12. Now once again let us apply the above law to the facts of the present case and see the interesting twist. To recollect, Daiichi acquired Ranbaxy whose subsidiary was Zenotech. Thus, Daiichi had to make an open offer also to the shareholders of Zenotech within three months of completion of acquisition of Ranbaxy, Daiichi or persons acting in concert with it (except for the interesting twist discussed later) had not acquired any shares of Zenotech in the preceding twenty-six weeks. Thus, Daiichi made an open offer at Rs.114 (rounded off here for simplic-ity), since that was the price determined as per the various parameters.

13. However, the question and interesting twist to the whole issue was this. Ranbaxy had become a subsidiary of Daiichi after the acquisition. At the time when the open offer was being made by Daiichi to shareholders of Zenotech, Ranbaxy was thus a subsidiary of Daiichi. By definition, a subsidiary company is deemed to be a person acting in concert with the holding company unless it is established otherwise. Thus, Ranbaxy was a person acting in concert with Daiichi.

14. Ranbaxy had obviously acquired shares of Zenotech when it took it over and as part of open offer. However, only after such takeover of Zenotech that Ranbaxy was itself taken over by and became subsidiary of Daiichi. Since the preceding twenty-six week period was to be considered, and since Zenotech was taken over by Ranbaxy during this period, obviously Ranbaxy had acquired shares of Zenotech during this period under the first open offer. The question was that whether the price paid by Ranbaxy during this period was to be taken into account.

15. The stakes were large. Ranbaxy had paid a price of Rs.160 and thus instead of the Rs.114 to be paid, Rs.160 would be required to be paid.

16. The aggrieved parties petitioned to SEBI who rejected the claim of increase of the offer price to Rs.160 (interestingly, the erstwhile Promoters of Zenotech holding 26% shares were themselves the primary petitioners). The petitioners went in appeal to the Securities Appellate Tribunal (‘SAT’).

17. The SAT held that since Ranbaxy was a sub-sidiary of Daiichi, it was deemed to be acting in concert with Daiichi. No claims were made to refute this legal presumption. The SAT held that since this was the case, the acquisitions made by Ranbaxy during the prescribed period would also have to be taken into account. Since Ranbaxy had paid Rs. 160 to acquire shares of Zenotech during this period, this higher price would have to be the open offer price. Thus, though the open offer price otherwise determined taking also the current price was Rs.114, the price to be actually offered was held to be Rs.160.

18. Now, one may be tempted to say that if the small and public shareholder is benefitted, it is a good thing. The question, however, is also of justice. Incidentally, it was the erstwhile Promoters of Zenotech who held 26% that would be the major beneficiaries. (A side bar here – normally the Promoters of the target company cannot participate in an open offer and it is restricted to public shareholders only. However, since Zenotech was already taken over, the erstwhile Promoters, though holding 26%, became public shareholders and thus eligible for the open offer). Further, it is possible that eventually Daiichi may also have to pay interest on Rs.160 (for the grace period granted under law, SAT has held though  that no interest  would    be payable).

 19. With great respect, I submit that the decision is not correct in law.

 20. Let us first look at the intention of the law. The intention, as I read the law, is that if an acquirer buys shares that triggers an open offer, the highest recent price’ paid by him should be considered and not merely the price at which the lot of shares that resulted in attraction of the open offer were acquired. For this purpose, since it often happens that many entities of the acquirer group acquire shares, the price paid by such persons acting in concert are also considered. However, it is strange that a person who was never a person acting in concert to start with at the time of the original acquisition, is now deemed to be acting in concert. When Ranbaxy bought shares of Zenotech it had nothing to do with Daiichi. To say that Ranbaxy was acting in concert with Daiichi in view of an event that happened later on and apply this to an earlier date is strange.
 
21. The words used are ‘acting’ in concert and this is in the present tense. Quite apparently, as on the date of original acquisition Ranbaxy was not ‘acting’ in concert with Daiichi.

22. The concept of deemed person acting in concert is an artificial concept and it is a well-settled principle of law that such artificial and deeming provisions should be construed strictly.

23. I do not know whether the SAT deliberately took a view to favour the small shareholders and of course there are no words to that effect though SAT does say that it has taken a ‘purposive’ interpretation of the law. I respectfully submit that on a plain and literal reading as well as reading in terms of the object of the law, the conclusion is, with great respect, not justified in law.

24. As I write this article, there are reports that Daiichi may go in appeal to the Supreme Court and it would be interesting to consider what the Su-preme Court has to say in the matter.

Recent relaxation to creeping acquisition limits

fiogf49gjkf0d
Securities Laws

This series of articles introducing securities laws for
listed companies to the lay reader continues . . .


(1) SEBI, vide Notification dated 30th October 2008 has
amended the Takeover Regulations. The amendment, in essence, permits an
acquirer, and persons acting in concert with him, hereinafter referred to as
promoter group/acquirer, to increase his holding by 5% by acquiring additional
shares or voting rights up to 5% through open market purchases or pursuant to
buyback of shares even if the promoter holding at present is in excess of 55%.

(2) The relaxation seems to be in the background of huge fall
in the stock market. It is apparently felt — rightly or wrongly — that the
present restrictions on promoter group buying shares should be relaxed and hence
this amendment has been made allowing promoter group holding 55% or more to buy
5% more shares from the stock market. Earlier, promoter group could not acquire
even a single share without making an open offer.

(3) The Notification amends Regulation 11(2) by inserting a
2nd proviso hereinafter referred to as the ‘2nd Proviso’ and also makes a
consequential amendment to Regulation 11(2A). There is also another amendment to
11(2). Here are some thoughts and issues.

(4) This new creeping acquisition is not available
annually
and repetitively, unlike the creeping acquisitions up to
55%. Thus, the acquirer will be able to increase his holding by another 5% only.
To give an example, the holding of 58% can be increased up to 63% only. It is
not as if the acquirer can go on increasing 5% every year.

(a) Having said that, there is no time limit for acquiring
this additional 5% and it can be done in stages. One could say that this
facility has been introduced to deal with the low market prices today.
However, there is no restriction of time or stock market indices and one can
acquire this additional 5% even if the market booms again ! Of course, SEBI
could drop this facility at that time ! !


(5) Also, the maximum holding after this additional
acquisition can be only up to 75%. Thus, for example, the promoter group holding
73% can acquire only an additional 2% and not 5%.

(a) The Regulations recognise the fact that there could be
two maximum promoters’ holding — 75% and 90%. However, there is no special
concession in the 2nd Proviso for companies where promoters hold 90%.


(6) Acquisitions are permitted only through normal open
market purchases on the stock exchange or pursuant to buyback of shares by the
Company.

(a) Such acquisitions cannot be through bulk
deals/negotiated deals or preferential allotment.


(7) Can an acquirer buy a single lot of shares through the
open market ?
This is important from many angles and in fact demonstrates
the conflicting objectives of SEBI/small shareholders and the promoters. SEBI
apparently wants that the acquisition should be from retail shareholders or at
least the opportunity should be available to all shareholders equally and
fairly. However, the reality can be that large quantity of shares may be with
shareholders such as FIIs, etc. If the promoters try to buy from the open
market, it is possible that the low liquidity may result in sharp increase in
the price even on purchase of a few shares. Bulk sellers may agree to sell at an
agreed price, though little higher than the market or, in present pathetic
times, even lower ! ! ! — considering that there may not be many buyers other
than the promoter group.

(a) To come back to the issue, can the promoters acquire a
large lot of shares from such sellers through a stock market operation ? While
strictly speaking such a purchase would be an open market purchase on the
stock exchange, we need to remember that the amendment specifically prohibits
bulk deals. SEBI also seems to have a paranoid view of synchronised deals and
even holding them indiscriminately to be manipulative, etc.


(8) Thus, there would be two categories of creeping
acquisitions. One creeping acquisition is for the slab of 15-55% where an
additional 5% is permitted in any manner, whether through open market purchases,
bulk deal, or otherwise including preferential allotment. The second slab is the
newly introduced 5%. Also, remember that up to 55%, one can acquire additional
5% every financial year.

(9) The issue is : How will the amendment affect a promoter
holding between 50-55% and if his acquisition of additional shares crosses 55%?
There is more than one complication here and let me raise some issues. Let me
illustrate by an example of an acquirer holding 53%.


(a) Firstly, can he acquire 2% in any form of purchases under creeping acquisition Regulation 11(1), and secondly, acquire additional shares under the new 2nd proviso only through the restricted route of open market purchases/buybacks ? On balance, he should be able to acquire 2% under 11(1) to reach 55% and purchase additional shares only under the new 2nd proviso to 11(2). However, I must admit that strictly and technically, there is scope for holding the other view, particularly if the purchase is through one lot that increases the holding, for example, increase in holding at one shot by 5% through preferential allotment.

(b) Will such person, after having acquired 2% (or even 5% under another interpretation and circumstances) under Regulation 11(1) be restricted to a further acquisition only 3% (0%) or can he acquire yet another 5% under the new 2nd proviso ? The answer seems to be that he can acquire another 5%. In fact, this would allow a person to acquire about 10% in a single financial year — 5% under 11(1) and another 5% under new proviso to 11(2). Thus, a person holding 50% can increase his holding to 60% in a single financial year.

(10) Now let us consider the amendment made by the 2nd Proviso permitting creeping acquisition also through buyback of shares, Let us first examine what the amendment is, and then consider the earlier controversy surrounding it and what is the change, if any.

(a) The amendment permits an acquirer to ‘acquire additional shares or voting rights’ …. (provided)
….  the acquisition  is :

•  made  through  open  market  ….   or

• the increase in the shareholding or voting rights is pursuant to a buyback of shares. (emphasis supplied).

ii) Thus, if a person holds, say, 55%, his holding, post-buyback can increase up to 60% under the 2nd Proviso.

iii) However, this is not as simple as it may sound because of peculiar mathematics. Let me explain as follows. The holding has to be between 55-75%. The buyback would affect differently, different holdings. To give an example, if a person holds 55%, a mere 8% buyback would result in increase in his holding by 5% (55/92% is 59.78%, i.e., there would be a 4.78% increase). A promoter holding 60% would find his holding increased by 5% at 7% buyback and for one holding 70%, 5% increase happens at just 6% buy-back. This problem would effectively limit the buyback that a company could carry out to 8% only, as compared to the maximum legal 25%. Of course, the simple solution is that the promoters should also sell their shares in a ,lmyback at the appropriate level to ensure that the net increase is only 5%. This may defeat the purpose of really giving retail investors a chance to sell their shares through this amendment. Also, in case of open market buyback, there is the issue of Promoter not being permitted to offer their shares in a ‘buyback’.

(b) I had written an article in the August 2008 issue of the BCAJ as to whether increase in percentage holding arising solely out of buyback of shares would amount to acquisition under the Takeover Regulations and thereby trigger an open offer or be counted as part of creeping acquisitions, etc. My view was that, on balance, even considering the fact that buybacks are initiated by the promoter, the ‘buy-back’ does not result in triggering ‘open offer’. This may be an anomaly and even an unfair loophole, but I had suggested that to remove this, the law needs to be specifically amended.

(c)To recollect further, in essence, the argument is that Regulations 10, 11 and others require a specific acquisition of shares or voting rights. If there is no acquisition, these Regulations  do not get attracted.  A buyback  of shares results in an increase in percentage  holding  without  any acquisition. While the promoters  cannot shrug off the  issue  by  saying  that  the  increase  is on account  of the company’s  decision when  they are in control of the company,  the fact remains that the express provisions of law do not cover ‘buyback’. SEBI,however, apparently required or permitted a practice by companies to seek an exemption for such increase and then wors-ened it by assuming in the recent amendment that this is also the law without amending 10, 11 and other Regulations. So where does this new amendment leave the view that increase in holding through buyback should not be counted for Regulations 10, 11, etc. ?

(d) Let us consider  here the exact wording  of the 2nd  proviso.   It  permits   an  acquirer   to “acquire additional shares or voting rights (provided) …. the  acquisition is made through  open market …. or the increase in the shareholding or voting rights of the acquirer is pursuant to a buyback of shares by the target company” (emphasis provided). Clearly, even this amendment is self-contradictory when it permits an acquirer to acquire additional shares and then clarifies that increase through buyback is also covered. Further, a strict view can be that even if increase through buyback is to be covered, it would be solely for the purposes of this clause only. One cannot, thus, require a person holding 14.99% shares, whose holding increases to, say, 15% on account of buyback to make an open offer. Again can law force a person holding 25% and whose holding increases to 30.1% on account of buyback, to make an open offer.

e) However, while we could debate endlessly, the reality is that companies/promoters have already been making applications for seeking exemption for increase on account of buyback. SEBI has also been expressly and publicly granting such exemptions on a case-to-case basis discussing the merits. SEBI has issued a Press Release indirectly stating that it considers increase through buyback as ‘creeping acquisition’. The recent amendment further supports this view. Consider also this in the background that in reality it is the promoter who pushes the buyback and it is the promoter who does not participate-in the buyback which results in the increase in promoter’s holding. All of this still cannot change the express provision of law. But, surely, a Judge interpreting this law, which requires a purposive interpretation, would want to inquire of the promoter how he can ignore the fact that his (promoter’s) holding has increased and hold that the amendment is effectively redundant?

11) SEBI has also made what seems to be a consequential amendment to 11(2A). Consistent with Regulation 11(2),Regulation 11(2A)provided that if a person holding between 55-75/90% seeks to acquire, he can do so only through an open offer. Now, the word ‘only’ has been dropped, apparently to suggest that one can acquire up to 5% under the 2nd Proviso but one could also go through the open offer route. This seems to be the intention, though the wording could have been better.

12) There is yet another interesting amendment to Regulation 11(2). Regulation 11(2) prohibits acquisition of ‘additional shares’. These words are amended and now read’ additional shares entitling him to exercise voting rights’. I confess I do not understand this amendment and its intent. The Take-over Regulations define shares as shares carrying voting rights including securities that entitle the holder to receive shares with voting rights, but excluding preference shares. The amendment now says that the additional shares should be such that should entitle the acquirer to exercise voting rights. Numerous questions arise of which I do not have answer and seek readers’ views:

a) Does this mean that, for acquisitions under 11(2), only shares presently carrying voting rights are covered? Does this mean, therefore, that, for example, fully convertible debentures can be acquired? But then, what would happen at the time of ‘conversion’ ?

b) The 2nd Proviso obviously is intended to be an exception to 11(2) and in such case, how can it have broader scope than 11(2) itself? Of course, under the 2nd Proviso one has to acquire ‘shares or voting rights’ through open market operations on the stock exchange and hence this issue may be academic.

c) Why has 11(1)not been so amended? Does this mean that creeping acquisition up to 55% may be of any type of ‘shares’ but thereafter, only by acquisitions of additional shares with such voting rights?

(13) To conclude, it is likely that this is just one of the many tweaking amendments that have been made to Regulations to try to revive stock markets. The law of course gets only more complex in the process! But who bothers.

Competition risk — Case study

Overview :

Inherent in business is the ‘risk of competition’, which can be local, regional, national and transnational. Surf faced it from Nirma and both are facing it from Ghadi and other regional brands. Despite the ‘risk of competition’, competition is the ‘breath and blood’ of business. Competition motivates managements to innovate. It creates entrepreneurs. Competition and competitiveness are necessary to meet the challenges of tomorrow. It improves both the cost and quality of the product. It would not be wrong to say that competition even changes the taste of the customer.

However, it is also necessary at this stage to see the impact of absence of competition. Its absence results in monopoly, deterioration in quality, increase in prices and consumer being short-charged. The automobile industry is an outstanding example of what absence and existence of competition has done in India. Padmini and Ambassador were both bad in quality and delivery. It used to be said that :

 

  •  the only thing that works is the horn, and

 

  •  one needs to book a car when a child is born.

 

Look at the market today. Competition has led not only to increased availability, but also improved quality and variety of models and makes. Cars at every price point are now available. ‘Nano’ the innovative product from Tata’s is changing the market. Many international car manufacturers are making India as the hub for producing small car. Again care for environment is internationally increasing competition for introducing hybrids. GM is working on a hybrid electric car which will give 230 miles per gallon. Daimler’s smart car will give 300 miles per gallon and Nissan’s product is expected to give 367 miles per gallon — Time 31 Aug. 2009.

Another outstanding example of what competition can do is our ‘telecom’ sector. It is the only product where cost to customer has reduced since the advent of mobile phone about a decade and half back. Today the customer pays not per minute of use but per second of use.

Nations fight for markets. That is what Doha is all about. Opening of services is expected to improve the quality of services. Even during the recent and current financial crises the impacted markets were inherently against taking protective measures as that would lead to lack of competition and result in a closed market which is against the interest of the consumer.

There are a number of factors that attract competition in a given business and industry. The primary factor of course is the prospect of earnings, and growth potential in term of revenues, profits, value addition, market share and customer base and loyalty. Hence, the challenges are :

 

A. The first real challenge is knowing your competitors, in being able to judge (i) the market segments that are exposed to the risk, (ii) the level and resources of the threat which they pose, (iii) the source of competition risk in respect of the particular competitors in terms of the 4ps of marketing, (iv) their relative strengths and weakness.

B. The second real challenge is in knowing what makes your products and services click in the market in the teeth of competition and why and how you are able to score over the competitors. These two aspects generally enable us to judge the extent of competition and its impact on our business.

C. The third aspect of competition risk pertains to potential and future competition. This is given by the attractiveness of the market, controlled by the extent and difficulty of entry barriers and the competition regulations and trade practices.

 

Competition encompasses not just the marketing and sales dimension of the organisation covering advertising, brand building and publicity, but affects the entire life cycle of the product and the organisation right from infrastructure planning, supply chain and sourcing, production, human resource to distribution, selling, after-sales service and even research and development.

The demand-supply equation, the entry barriers, the customer preferences, industry size, local, regional and global position all these determine the type and extent of competition an organisation is likely to face.

However ‘competition risk’ is not merely about the risk that your competitors will overtake you and make your product obsolete and your service look much poorer in comparison to theirs, or that they will beat you in the price or in reaching and occupying the market place and the hearts and minds of the consumers. ‘Competition risk’ could be both local and global. Apart from the 4ps of product, price, promotion and place which is the traditional sparring battle ground for competition, competition may also arise and manifest itself in location, policies, product mix, branding, recruitment and even reward and incentive schemes to staff as well as to customers.

‘Competition risk’ often goes much beyond into the realm of opportunities, possibilities, chance, market segments and niches that an organisation fails to spot and cash in on and the competitors are able to capitalise on. In fact creativity, innovative thinking and out-of-the-box approach often are the only offence and defense for dealing with competition.

Effectively dealing with the external risk of competition requires :

 

  •  A thorough understanding of the market

 

  •  An analysis of the environment, political, social, economic and cultural.

 

  •  An understanding of selective strengths and weaknesses of the organisation and its products and services vis-à-vis the competition.

 

  •  An understanding of potential competitors and the entry and exit barriers.

 

  •  A strategic and operational knowledge of competitor activity and customer expectations.

 

Thus, as can be seen from the above, it is indeed a very complex and daunting task, but it is nevertheless essential as without this, one cannot survive the competition.

The example for this month’s case study on competition risk is that of a company operating holiday tours and travel packages.

‘Sweet Memories’ is a tour company that was started about 15 years back in Mumbai. This company initially catered to the middle and lower middle-class segment and according to the budgets and the general trends in these times, arranged tours – and holiday packages to places of interest and cultural themes. It initially arranged tours to the West and South. This was followed by covering Rajasthan and the North.

Around four to five years back it started operating tours overseas to destinations in South-East Asia, Far East, Australia, New Zealand and is now arranging tours even to Europe and U.S.A. The customers are still essentially budget travellers belonging to the ” middle-class segment.

Of late the owners who have been casual in their approach and relying on word-of-mouth publicity ‘ and offering value for money to customers as their mainstay to survive in the market have found business difficult with the new entrants and bigger travel companies coming in with innovative concepts like theme tours, budget tours, action packed tours, exotic destinations and even sports-based tourism like the IPL South Africa tours.

Revenues of Sweet Memories have fallen and the management is at a loss as to how to deal with this” threat of sudden onslaught of competition with high-end tours, large publicity budgets, beautiful travel brochures, exotic destinations and innovative ideas.

They therefore approach you as a professional risk manager and consultant to identify and analyse competition risks and advise the tour company on the next course of action and develop an immediate plan to stop customers from migrating to competition. ‘

Suggested    solution for competition risk:

Competition risk analysis needs to be done of the, potential tour market based on :

Identifying existing and future risk for Sweet Memories:

An analysis of the situation reveals the following major issues:


Challenges and risks encountered from  competition:

1. Judging the high-end tourist market segments’ needs and expectations.

2. Identifying strategies of new entrants – e.g., price.

3. Developing a positioning strategy and organised approach from the existing casual unorganised approach.

4. Expanding own share in the pie and expanding the pie itself.

5. Review existing marketing plan: Product, pricing, promotion and locational access.

Strategies for overcoming existing competition risk:

1. SWOT analysis:

a. First step is to evaluate internal capabilities and identify areas which require improvement.

b. Determine  the scope of improvement.

c. Making small modifications to eliminate un-productive activities. This process requires ‘persistence’.

d. Conducting ABC analysis of revenue generating tourists and repeat tourists.

e. Identifying opportunities – that is – creating new untapped space in the market. e.g., International business exhibition tours, grooming and training with leisure tours for corporate executives, etc.

2. Study regional and international top 5 tour operators:

a. Complete  package  of offerings

b. Value added features like pickup and escorting services.

c. Customised onboard meal: Veg, Non-Veg. [ain, etc.

d. Event based tours: Brazil Carnival, New Year in Australia

e. Theme based tours: African safari, Buddhist circle, gaming, Dassera in Mysore and Christmas in Jeurusalem.

f. Promotion  and Branding  strategies

g. Hospitality training to their guides, cooks, other professionals

3. Strong Brand Building and positioning activities will lead towards reaching the customer’s Evoked Set (Unconscious Mind) and help in discriminating customer preferences and choice.

a. Providing a travel kit with most common and essential items with a logo mark.

b. Attractive and innovative brochures with graphics and a colorful appeal.

c. Positioning themselves as High-end quality of service with cost benefit.

d. Creating jingles, slogans, a cartoon character, modified colorfullogo, uniform dressing style for their professionals, etc.

4. Keeping a track of environmental happenings and events directly or indirectly influencing the industry: Social, Legal, Economical, Political, Technological and Cultural environments.

a) Assigning a representative in major interna-tionallocations will help in identifying key events and happening, which are not captured by major media agents.

b) Preparing a calendar with notes of future happening events and subsequently designing tour packages around those happenings – for example, Olympics in China and forthcoming Commonwealth games in Delhi.

6. Optimising  Entry and Exit Barriers

a. Creating a niche in the market which becomes a trademark and difficult to imitate by other competitors

b. Besides risk of existing competition, organisation should also open up their vision for other threats like:

1. Bargaining  power  of customers

2. Bargaining  power  of suppliers

3. Threat  from new  entrants

4. Threat from substitute  products

Porter’s    5 forces  for an organisation’s    risk:

– Risk of customer consistently demanding better quality product at reduced price.

– Suppliers demand higher volumes with sufficient margins and shorter payment cycle.

– New entrants possess more features with enhanced strengths like distribution power, innovative promotion, etc.

– Substitute product like jewellery or watches; amusement parks and resorts for tour operators; Nano car for two-wheelers’ market, etc. threatens the ability to cover large market share.

7. Adopting combination of marketing competition warfare strategies:

Sweet Memories depending on the market conditions and result of market study and analysis can adopt a combination of one or more of the following strategies to ward off competition risk.

a. Offensive marketing warfare strategies –  are used to secure competitive advantages; market leaders, runner-ups or struggling competitors are usually attacked.

b. Defensive marketing warfare strategies – are used to defend competitive advantages; lessen risk of being attacked, decrease effects of attacks, strengthen position.

c. Flanking marketing warfare strategies –
 Operate in areas of little importance to the competitor.

d. Guerrilla marketing warfare strategies – Attack, retreat, hide, then do it again, and again, until the competitor moves on to other markets.

e. Deterrence strategies –
 Deterrence is a battle won in the mind of the enemy. You convince the competitor that it would be prudent to keep out of your markets.

f. Pre-emptive strike – 
Attack before you are attacked.

g. Frontal attack – 
 A direct head-on  confrontation.

h. Flanking attack –
  Attack the competitor’s  flank.

i. Sequential strategies – A strategy that consists of a series of sub-strategies that must all be sue” – cessfully carried out in the right order.

j. Alliance strategies – The use of alliances and partnerships to build strength and stabilise situations.

k. Position defence –  The erection of fortifications.

l. Mobile defence – 
 Constantly  changing positions.

m. Encirclement strategy –
 Envelop the opponent’s position.

n. Cumulative strategies – A collection of seemingly random operations that, when complete, obtain your objective.

o. Counter-offensive – When you are under attack, launch a counter-offensive at the attacker’s weak point.

p. Strategic withdrawal – Retreat and regroup so you can live to fight another day.

q. Flank positioning  – 
 Strengthen  your flank.

r.  Leapfrog strategy    – 
Avoid confrontation by bypassing enemy  or competitive forces.

To summarise, once competition risk has been identified, it has to be dealt with using a combination of strategies and tackled at all levels to keep competition out of the way. The selection of the strategy, techniques, tools will depend on your own financial and marketing strength, the competitor’s strength and the existing and expected market conditions.

Initially, the ‘risk advisor’ advised Sweet Memories to:

– renegotiate terms  with  suppliers

– add features to its tours, e.g., air conditioned buses

– develop advertising material in the form of brochures

– employ strategy of distributing brochures through newspaper vendors

– hold low-cost customer meetings prior to the departure of a tour

– distribute travel  kits at such meetings

– give specific information on places covered by the tour – e.g.,famous temples, churches, historic buildings, museums, gardens, etc. This information is normally available in local brochures.

The above low-cost strategy  has worked  in increasing the inflow  of customers  and  the efforts of the ‘risk adviser’  were appreciated.  It however  needs to ‘- be noted that ‘competition  risk’ is an always  existing risk and the management  has to be vigilant and pro-active  at all times.

Countries see hazards in free flow of capital

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

30. Countries see hazards in free flow of capital


In China and Taiwan, regulators are imposing fresh
restrictions on stock market investments by foreigners. In Brazil, officials
have twice raised taxes on foreign investors. Even in South Korea, host to this
week’s Group of 20 meeting, pressure is building on the government to take
similar steps.

As the leaders of the 20 major economic powers gather in
Seoul, an increasing number of them have either imposed curbs or are in the
process of doing so to slow the torrent of hot money into their markets.

Short-term investment is now increasingly viewed as something
that needs to be controlled.

Emerging markets have been grappling all year with the
consequences of a flight of investor capital from rock-bottom interest rates in
Western countries in search of higher yields. Short-term capital investment in
emerging markets — largely in stock markets, which are at an all-time high — are
expected to hit $ 458 billion this year, the highest figure since 2007 when $
784 billion flowed into these markets, according to the Institute of
International Finance.

(Source : The Business Standard, dated 12-11-2010)

levitra

Indian veggies, fruits remain highly toxic

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

28. Indian veggies, fruits remain highly toxic


Rampant use of banned pesticides in fruits and vegetables
continues to put at risk the life of the common man. Farmers apply pesticides
such as chlordane, endrin and heptachor that can cause serious neurological
problems, kidney damage and skin diseases. A study conducted by Delhi-based NGO
Consumer-Voice reveals that the amount of pesticides used in eatables in India
is as much as 750 times the European standards. The survey collected sample data
from various wholesale and retail shops in Delhi, Bangalore and Kolkata.

(Source : The Times of India, dated 4-11-2010)

(Comment : The issue is what should the citizens do when the
authorities are apathetic to the consequences. The farmers should be made aware
of the harmful consequences. These also harm the health of the farmers coming in
contact with the chemicals.)

levitra

Soon, pay just Rs.50k for heart surgery

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

29. Soon, pay just Rs.50k for heart surgery


Want your heart fixed for just Rs.50,000 by skilled surgeons
in a top hospital with a family member to care for you ? Your wish will soon
come true. For, India’s first low–cost hospital will be up and running in Mysore
early next year.

These state-of-the art hospitals will be built at a cost of
Rs.16 crore, about one-fifth the cost of constructing a 300-bed super-speciality
hospital.

The brainchild of renowned cardio surgeon Dr. Devi Shetty,
this unique hospital will be piloted in Mysore and then in Siliguri (West
Bengal) and Bhubaneswar (Orissa).

Narayana Hrudayalaya has tied up with Larsen & Toubro to
execute the Mysore project which uses prefabricated material transported from
Puducherry. The general wards will receive daylight to the desired levels. Only
the OT complex and pre/post operation and ICU areas will have a conventional
concrete structure. “Most hospitals have huge vertical structures with heavy
air-conditioning. The best sanitizer for a hospital is sunlight and fresh air.
Dr. Shetty said, heart surgeries will be performed for Rs.50,000 and other
surgeries like gall bladder and hernia will cost between Rs.10,000 and
Rs.15,000. While hospitals in Mysore, Bhubaneswar and Siliguri will come up on
land given at subsidised rates, other hospitals will come up on the public
private partnership model.

(Source : The Times of India, dated 25-10-2010)

(Source : The Business Standard, dated 11-11-2010)

levitra

Human development — India at the bottom of the barrel

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

27. Human development — India at the bottom of the barrel


The most important takeaway for India from the recently
released United Nations Human Development Report, The Real Wealth of Nations :
Pathways to Human Development, is the ‘crucial and compelling evidence’ that
there is a lack of any significant correlation between economic growth and
improvements in health and education.

In the last few years, investments — and interest — in
India’s social sector have improved. Yet, as the report proves, the work is far,
far from over : between 2005 and 2010 — also the years of economic growth —
India has moved up only one step on the Human Development Index ladder. It’s now
at 119, out of 169 countries and areas.

This year, being the 20th edition of the HDR, three new
indices were introduced to make the process more robust : the
inequality-adjusted Human Development Index, the Gender
Inequality Index (GII) and the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI).

Though India’s HDI (0.519) is above the average of 0.516, for
countries in South Asia, in GII, it is embarrassingly behind even Bangladesh and
Pakistan, ranked at 116 and 112, respectively. The GII reflects women’s
disadvantages in reproductive health, empowerment and economic activity.

With women at such a low priority level, is it surprising
that we languish below on other indicators too ? Equally sad is our MPI : 55%
Indians suffer from multiple deprivations; the average in South Asia is 54%.

(Source : The Hindustan Times, dated 11-11-2010)

 

 

levitra

McKinsey suggests e-payment to plug leakage of government funds

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

26. McKinsey suggests e-payment to plug leakage of government
funds


An inefficient payment system is leading to an annual loss of Rs.1 trillion for the Government, and this can be tackled through
an electronic payment model, management consulting firm McKinsey and Co. said in
a report titled Inclusive growth and financial security : The benefits of
e-payments to Indian society. The report was commissioned by the Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation.

A major chunk of this leakage — nearly Rs.71,000 crore — is
part of the Government welfare schemes to households, the McKinsey report said.

Current payment flows between the Government and individual
households, including subsidies and social services to individual citizens, is
around Rs.13 trillion.

According to the report, transaction costs account for 15-20%
of total losses to the Government and overhead and administrative costs around
5-10%. Leakages account for 75-80% of total losses.

Transaction costs are associated with cash or cheque payments
at payment source and destination, and overhead and administrative costs are a
result of manual payment processing, audits, and payment reconciliation.
Leakages are caused when payments of benefits or for services are diverted to
unintended individuals or groups, the report said.

(Source : The Mint Newspaper, dated 2-11-2010)

 

 

 

 

levitra

Apple flips the playbook, putting mobile technology in PCs

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

24. Apple flips the playbook, putting mobile technology in
PCs


Over the last few years, Apple used technologies from its
Macintosh computers to create the iPhone and the iPad, building a multi-billion
dollar mobile computing business that now accounts for 60% of its revenue.

Now Apple is doing the reverse, taking technologies like the
multi-touch user interface from the iPhone and the iPad and using them to
refresh its Mac business. Steven P. Jobs, the chief executive, unveiled two
versions of its ultra-thin MacBook Air laptops. He also demonstrated an early
version of Apple’s new OS X operating system, which will be available next
summer.

The new MacBooks come in two sizes of screens, 11.6-inch and
13.3-inch. They weigh 2.3 pounds, and 2.9 pounds, respectively. For comparison,
the iPad weighs 1.5 pounds. The laptops’ thickness tapers from 0.68 of an inch
at one end to 0.11 of an inch at the other. They have no optical or magnetic
storage. Instead, like the iPad, they are built on Flash storage, which allows
them to turn on instantly when powered up.

(Source : The Economic Times, dated 22-10-2010)

levitra

The art of managing bosses

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

25. The art of managing bosses


This communication touches upon many different aspects,
including communicating with your boss, peers, staff and people from other
cultures.

So often when we talk about management we automatically think
of those who report to us. But what about managing upwards ? After all, the boss
can make your life so much sweeter. There are some real skills needed here — and
you have to carefully think through your approach.

  •   Get to know your boss’ goals and challenges. Your boss has goals just like
    you. Find out and remember them. It’s easier to win more resources if they
    can deliver targets for your boss.


  •   Get to know the boss personally. How does he or she like to work ? What
    are his or her interests, likes or dislikes ?


  •   Set goals together. You need to make sure that you’re working on the right
    things. Don’t just update your boss with your achievements. Let him or her
    know where you’ll next be prioritising your attention.



  • Avoid surprises. No one wants to hear bad news. If you’ve got a suspicion
    that some-thing’s not going as planned, then let the boss know — fast !


  •   Talk their language. Every boss has a way of processing information. Some
    like headlines. Others like bottom lines. Find out and learn their language.


  •   Deliver on your commitments. It’s a rare boss who complains about a high
    achiever in their team. Deliver against your objectives and your boss’
    respect for you will rocket.


  •   Go to your boss with solutions — not just problems. Isn’t that what you
    want from your staff ? Show the boss that you’ve thought things through,
    even if you both come up with a different answer.


Always be tactful :

What is tact ? It’s choosing the right thing to say without
offending. ‘Choosing’ is the important word here. Tactless people don’t exercise
that choice. They instantly say what’s on their mind —and wish they hadn’t.
Managers have to filter what they say.

When you find yourself in a difficult conversation follow the
TACT approach.

T = Think — don’t speak. Any first rush of emotion soon
subsides. Get your brain under control and show interest. Do this and you’re 75%
of the way there.

A = Ask questions. There are two reasons for doing this.
First, questioning allows you crucial time to think. Second, you’re showing
respect by encouraging the person to give their view.

C = Clarify your understanding. Use clarification questions
to check that you fully understand the other person’s point of view. “So what
you’re upset about is . . . .”

T = Talk with care. Give yourself time and make sure that
what you say is neutral. Later on you may give your opinion because you’ve
thought it through. But do you need to do so now ?

(Source : The Mint Newspaper, dated 25-10-2010)

 

2013-TIOL-1550-CESTAT-MUM Varun Shipping Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai

fiogf49gjkf0d
Payment of tax before receipt of consideration is an advance and not an excess payment and thus can rightly be adjusted suo motu against the actual liability.

Facts:

The appellant paid service tax in December 2008 and reflected the same as advance payment of tax in the return for the period October 2008 to March 2009 without intimating the range superintendent. On receiving the consideration in April 2009, appellant adjusted the said advance and reflected the same in the return for the period April- September 2009. The department contended that the said payment was not an advance payment but excess payment and thus the appellant could not adjust it suo motu in terms of Rule 6(4B) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 and demanded the tax thereon with interest and penalty.

Held:
Observing that the appellant had reflected the payment of advance payment of tax particulars in both the returns, it was evident that what the appellant made was advance payment of tax and not excess payment of tax. Since the liability to pay tax arose only in April 2009, the Hon. Tribunal held that the payment made prior to such date can be contemplated only as an advance and thus no service tax was liable to be paid.

levitra

2013 (32) STR 179 (Tri.-Delhi) Delhi Public School Society vs. Commissioner of Service Tax.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Whether agreement to provide expertise, guidance etc. for setting up an enterprise for running an educational institution along with provision of brand name without sharing any profit or loss arising from said enterprises amounts to Joint Venture Agreement and not subjected to service tax?

Facts:
The appellant having a brand image and reputation for establishing and managing schools entered into an agreement termed as “Education Joint Venture Agreement” with other parties for setting up schools for the use of their brand name and to continue to provide managerial and operational techniques and standards of imparting education against receipt of annual fees. The appellant neither had any obligation for sharing any losses arising out of this activity nor enjoyed the benefits arising out of successful running of the other party’s institutions.

The Respondent issued various show cause notices for demanding service tax on the fees received in pursuance of the said Joint Venture Agreement under the category of “Franchise Fees” and confirmed the demand along with penalties.

Held:
It was held that the financial burden of establishing and maintaining the school was solely on the other party which signalled the absence of any partnership or joint venture and that the appellant was neither supposed to contribute towards capital nor liable for any loss or profit,
the appellant provided service not to itself but to other parties to the agreement. The Hon. Tribunal held that the scope of the Appellant clearly got covered within the category of ‘Franchise’ service as the ingredients of ‘franchise’ being satisfied, however quashed the show cause notices which were beyond the normal period of limitation, as there was no case of suppression.

levitra

2013-TIOL-1518-CESTAT-MUM TCS e-serve Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-II

fiogf49gjkf0d
Data processing services provided to banks cannot be treated as “business auxiliary service” as it is not customer care, it is excluded from its scope.

Facts:

The appellant provided collection and sales service, call centre services and computerised data processing services and discharged service tax liability on the same with effect from 01-07-2003, 01-05-2006 and 01-05-2010 respectively under the categories of business auxiliary service and business support service.

On the activity of data processing, service tax was demanded with effect from 01-07-2003 under “Business Auxiliary Services” alleging that the customers of the bank submitted physical documents at the bank’s branches and the appellant performed computerised processes on the input submitted to the bank using the bank’s systems and saved the output on the bank’s system, which amounted to services incidental or auxiliary to the customer care services rendered by the bank. However, the reasoning recorded in the impugned order was that the appellant collected data from the clients’ customers, and the banks during the course of providing banking services also provided customer care services, and the services rendered by the appellant to the bank were incidental or auxiliary to the customer care services provided by the bank. It was also contended that the services provided by the appellant were not customer care services but banking and financial services as provided by the bank to its customers. The services of computerised data processing as specifically excluded under business auxiliary service cannot be taxed under the said category. Moreover the majority of the clients were located outside India and since the consideration was received in foreign  exchange, the services were to be treatedas exports and thus there would be no liability of service tax.

Held:

Observing that the order-in-original deviated from the charges made in the show cause notice, the Hon. Tribunal held that since there was a complete variation between the grounds alleged in the show cause notice and the grounds on which the demands were confirmed, the impugned order was liable to be set aside on that ground alone. The Hon. Tribunal also considered the other submissions of the appellant and held that no service tax was liable to be paid under business auxiliary service.

levitra

2013-TIOL-1568-CESTAT-MUM Kpit Cummins Infosystems Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-I

fiogf49gjkf0d
Service tax being destination based consumption tax, services received outside India by branches of an Indian company outside India not liable for service tax u/s. 66A of the Finance Act, 1994.

Facts:
The overseas branches of the appellant provided services abroad and remitted the consideration for the bills raised by them to its Indian head office after deducting the expenditure incurred. Further, the appellant also had permanent establishments abroad by way of personnel located in the offices of their various clients and so remitted certain amount for the expenditure incurred by them for providing various services. The department contended to levy tax on the above said activities of the appellant. The appellant contended that the branches and the Indian head office were not independent entities and so there cannot be selfservice and assuming that they were independent entities, since the services were rendered abroad and consideration received in foreign exchange, it amounted to export of service. The case was of providing services abroad by the branches and not receiving of services from abroad by the Indian company to attract provisions of section 66A of the Act. Further, for the services provided by permanent establishments abroad, it was already subjected to the local tax laws and hence there was no jurisdiction with the Indian authorities to levy tax on the same.

Held:
Referring to the provisions of section 66A and affirming to the contentions of the  appellant, the Hon. Tribunal remanded the appeal with regards to the only question whether the adjudicating authority had any jurisdiction for the services completely rendered outside India and on which tax liability was already discharged under the local laws where the activity took place.

levitra

Speculative business: Section 43(5) proviso (d): A. Y. 2006-07: Proviso (d) to section 43(5) inserted w.e.f. 01-04-2006: Transactions in derivatives on recognised stock exchange not deemed speculative: Rule prescribing conditions for notification framed on 01-07-2005: Notification in January 2006: Notification has retrospective effect: Loss in derivative transactions during July 2005 and September 2005 is not deemed speculative:

fiogf49gjkf0d
CIT vs. NASA Finelease P. Ltd.; 358 ITR 305:

The assessee was engaged in the business of dealing in securities and investments. The assessee had claimed a loss of Rs. 1,90,29,988 in derivative transactions during the period July, 2005 and September, 2005 and claimed that it is not deemed speculative in view of exclusion in proviso to clause (d) to section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Notification dated 25th January, 2006 notifying the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange for that purpose. The Assessing Officer held that the loss was speculative loss u/s. 73, and since the derivative transactions were during the period July, 2005 to September, 2005, they were violative of proviso (d) to section 43(5) and the benefit of Notification dated 25th January, 2006 is not applicable for those transactions. The Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal and held that the assessee was entitled to the benefit u/s. 43(5) proviso (d) read with the said Notification dated 25th January, 2006.

On appeal by the Revenue, the Delhi High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“i) Notification No. 2 of 2006, dated 25-01-2006, issued by CBDT does not specify any particular date and simply notifies the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange under proviso (d) to section 43(5) of the Act. Issue of notification obviously had to take some time as it involved processing and examination of applications etc. This was a matter relating to procedure and the delay in issue of notification or even framing of the Rules was due to administrative constraints.

ii) The delay occasioned, as procedure and formalities have to be complied with, should not disentitle or deprive an assessee, specially, when the transactions were carried through a notified stock exchange. The notification was procedural and necessary adjunct to the section enforced w.e.f. 01-04-2006.

iii) The rule and notification issued in the present case effectuate the statutory and the legislative mandate. There was no reason to interfere with the findings of the Tribunal.”

levitra

Penalty: Concealment: Section 271(1)(c): A. Y. 2002-03: Assessee, a limited company, made a claim for deduction of loss in the course of assessment proceedings: AO rejected the claim and imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(c): Penalty not justified: Liberal view is required to be taken as necessarily the claim is bound to be scrutinised both on facts and law:

fiogf49gjkf0d
CIT vs. DCM Ltd.; 262 CTR 295 (Del):

For the A. Y. 2002-03, in the course of the assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3), the assessee company made a claim that the loss of Rs. 95.55 lakh on account of loan granted to its subsidiary DCM International Ltd., which was written off, was deductible as business expenditure or in alternative as capital loss. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim and also imposed penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) for concealment of income. The Tribunal deleted the penalty.

On appeal by the Revenue, the Delhi High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“i) It is not disputed or denied that the loan in fact was granted and has been also written off. There was no concealment or furnishing of inaccurate facts. Case is completely covered by Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c). It is not disputed that full factual matrix or the facts were before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment when this claim was made. The fact that scrutiny assessment was pending is a relevant and important circumstance to show the bona fides of the assessee as he was aware that the claim would be examined and would not go unnoticed.

ii) Secondly, the claim was rejected in view of the legal position, which was against the assessee and not because of statement of incorrect or wrong facts. Law does not bar or prohibit an assessee for making a claim, which he believes may be accepted or is plausible. When such a claim is made during the course of regular or scrutiny assessment, liberal view is required to be taken as necessarily the claim is bound to be carefully scrutinised both on facts and in law. Full probe is natural and normal.

iii) Threat of penalty cannot become a gag and/ or haunt on assessee for making a claim which may be erroneous or wrong, when it is made during the course of the assessment proceedings. Normally penalty proceedings in such cases should not be initiated unless there are valid or good grounds to show that factual concealment has been made or inaccurate particulars on facts were provided in the computation.

iv) There is no merit in the present appeal and the same has to be dismissed.”

levitra

Industrial undertaking: Deduction u/s. 80-I: A. Ys. 1993-94 and 1994-95: Profit must be derived from industrial undertaking: Ownership of industrial undertaking is not a condition precedent:

fiogf49gjkf0d
Krishak Bharti Co-operative Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT: 358 ITR 168 (Del):

The assessee had an ammonia/urea plant at H. Just next to it and within its premises, the Hazira ammonia extension plant, which manufactured heavy water, had been set up and established by the Heavy Water Board, which was part of the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India. There was an agreement between the assessee and the Government of India whereby the assessee operated and maintained the heavy water plant. The heavy water plant belonging to the Heavy Water Board and the ammonia/urea plant of the assessee were both integrated with each other. The process of manufacture of the heavy water plant was dependent on the supply of synthesis gas enriched with deuterium which was a by-product of the assessee’s ammonia/ urea plant. The assessee received service charges from the Heavy Water Board and claimed deduction u/s. 80-I in respect of it. The claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal upheld the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground that the industrial undertaking manufacturing heavy water was not a part of the ammonia/urea plant of the assessee. It held that the service charges received by the assessee from the Heavy Water Board could not be treated as having been derived from an industrial undertaking of the assessee.

On appeal by the assessee, the Delhi High Court reversed the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“i) A provision in a taxing statute granting incentives for promoting growth and development should be construed liberally.

ii) A plain reading of section 80-I(1) and (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, would indicate that the ownership by the assessee of an industrial undertaking from which assessee derives profits and gains is not a stipulated condition. The only thing that has to be seen is whether the source of the profit or gains is an industrial undertaking.

iii) The service charges received by the assessee were profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking and were eligible for a deduction u/s. 80-I.”

levitra

Business expenditure: TDS: Works contract: Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) r/w. section 194C: Assessee running coaching classes for competitive exams: Agreement with franchisees: Not a works contract: Tax not deductible at source on payment to franchisees: Amount paid to franchisees not disallowable u/s. 40(a)(ia):

fiogf49gjkf0d
CIT vs. Career Launcher India Ltd.; 358 ITR 179(Del):

The assessee was a company engaged in providing education and training for various preparatory examinations like IIM, IIT, designing, etc. These services were provided across the country through education centres run by the assessee itself or by its franchisees. For the A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07, the Assessing Officer disallowed the amounts paid to the franchisees relying on section 40(a)(ia) on the ground that the assessee had not deducted tax at source which it was obliged to do u/s. 194C of the Act. The Tribunal deleted the disallowance and held that the agreement was not for making any payment to licensee for any work done for the assessee and that it was a case of sharing of fees for carrying out respective obligations under a contract. It held that neither section 194C nor section 40(a) (ia) was applicable.

On appeal by the Revenue, the Delhi High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“i) The agreements with franchisees were not the simple cases of the assessee engaging certain other persons to conduct the learning centres for which they were to be paid. The agreements were much more complex and reflected a business arrangement, as opposed to a contract for carrying out a work. Both the parties, the assessee and the licensee had entered into this agreement only in their mutual interest and for mutual gains. It was a simple case of permitting the use of its trade name or reputation by the licensees for a consideration.

ii) The provisions of section 194C and section 40(a)(ia) were not applicable to the facts of the case.”

levitra

Business expenditure: TDS: Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) r/w. s/s. 9(1)(vii) and 195: A. Y. 2007- 08: Circular in force during relevant year not obliging to deduct tax at source: Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) not proper: Subsequent withdrawal of Circular not relevant:

fiogf49gjkf0d
CIT vs. Model Exims; 358 ITR 72(All):

In the A. Y. 2007-08, the Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs. 57,49,489 paid to overseas entities as commission relying on section 40(a)(ia) on the ground that tax is not deducted at source u/s. 195 of the Act. The Assessing Officer rejected the contention of the assessee that the assessee was not obliged to deduct tax at source on the said payments in view of the Circular Nos. 23 of 1969, 163 of 1975 and 786 of 2000 and accordingly the said payments were not taxable in the hands of the recipients. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance and held that the Circular No. 7 of 2009 withdrawing the above said circulars was operative only from 22nd October, 2009, and not prior to that date and had no bearing in the instant assessment year. The Tribunal confirmed the order of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. On appeal by the Revenue, the Allahabad High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“i) The Circulars did not oblige the assessee to deduct tax at source. The assessment in question for the A. Y. 2007-08 would be governed by the Circular, which was operative at the relevant time. The assessee was not entitled to deduct tax at source.

ii) Circular No. 7 of 2009, dated 22-10-2009, withdrawing the earlier Circulars became operative only from that date. The Circulars in the relevant year were binding on the Department and the Assessing Officer did not have any right to ignore the Circulars and to disallow u/s. 40(a) (ia) of the Act, for non-deduction of tax at source u/s. 195.”

levitra

Fees received for assistance/services provided to Indian companies to whom loans, etc. are provided by the financial organisation from UK is business income — In absence of PE, is not chargeable to tax in India.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 3

Part C : Tribunal & AAR International Tax Decisions




JDIT v. M/s. Commonwealth Development Corporation

(2010) TII 102 ITAT-Mum.-Intl.

Article 7, 12(5) & 13 of India-UK DTAA

S. 2(28A) of Income-tax Act

Dated : 25-2-2010

11. Fees received for assistance/services provided
to Indian companies to whom loans, etc. are provided by the financial
organisation from UK is business income — In absence of PE, is not chargeable to
tax in India.

Upfront appraisal fee received by the UK financial
organisation constitutes ‘interest’ in terms of S. 2(28A) of the Income-tax Act
— However, such appraisal fee is not ‘interest’ in terms of India-UK DTAA.

Front-end fee recovered from the investee to whom
debt support is provided, is, ‘interest’, under the Income-tax Act as also DTAA.

Capital gain from transfer of shares in Indian
company is chargeable to tax in India.

Facts :

The assessee, a statutory corporation established
in the UK (CDC) was engaged in the business of providing loans to, and making
investment in shares of, Indian companies. The issue pertained to taxation of
the following four receipts :

(i) Director’s fees received from the Indian
companies for assistance/services rendered by CDC to Indian companies.

(ii) Appraisal fees received by CDC for
determining future profitability and worthiness for projects of Indian company
before CDC disbursed loans by way of convertible bonds, shares or debts to the
Indian Investees.

(iii) Front-end fee claimed to have been charged
for recovering cost of post-appraisal, other than cost of legal documents
which was the obligation of the investee.

(iv) CDC had sold certain shares of an Indian
company which were admittedly held as capital asset. It was the claim of CDC
that shares were held outside India and were sold outside India and hence not
taxable in India.

Held :

The ITAT held that :

  • Having regard to
    the earlier decision of the ITAT in appellant’s own case, assistance provided
    to the investee companies was not in the nature of fees for included services.
    In terms of DTAA, such income would not be taxable in India.



  • Upfront appraisal
    fee was ‘interest’ within the scope of S. 2(28A) of the Income-tax Act. In
    view of ITAT :



  • Upfront appraisal fee
    was charged before advancing loan or making investment of any kind.



  • S. 2(28A) covered
    service fee or other charges for debt incurred. Additionally, it also included
    service fee or other charges in respect of any credit facility which has not
    been utilised.



  • The first limb of
    S. 2(28A) which covered service fee/charge for debt incurred was not attracted
    in the present case as the appraisal fee was recovered even before any debt
    was incurred. However, being service fee for credit facility not utilised,
    such fee was ‘interest’.



  • Though such amount
    was ‘interest’ in term of the Income-tax Act, it was not ‘interest’ under DTAA
    as definition of interest under DTAA is restrictive and covered only income
    from debt claim.



  • Taxpayer’s
    contention that front-end fee is not related to debt investment is not
    acceptable. Front-end fee was charged by the taxpayer only if the investment
    was made in the form of debt and not for investment in the form of equity. No
    information was provided about the services for which front-end fee was
    charged. In the circumstances, the income was regarded as having direct nexus
    with the debt claim. Hence, it was ‘interest’ both in terms of the Income-tax
    Act as also DTAA.



  • Capital gain earned
    by CDC on transfer of shares of an Indian company was chargeable to tax in
    India. The ITAT rejected contention of the taxpayer that such income can be
    regarded as income arising from sale of asset outside India.



  • Share of a company
    represents bundle of rights. Though the shares are freely transferable, a
    contract between transferer and transferee regarding sale of shares is not
    complete till it is approved by the company and change of name in the register
    of a shareholder. The share in a company gives right to the shareholders to
    participate in profits as also in liquidation proceeds. Transfer of shares of
    an Indian company results in transfer of right to property/capital assets
    situated in India, irrespective of where the transfer is effected. In lieu
    thereof, charge to capital gain is attracted in terms of S. 9(1)(i) of
    Income-tax Act, which is not relieved by DTAA.

 

levitra

Compensation received by UK buyer pursuant to arbitration award, on account of failure of Indian entity to meet its export obligation — Business income — In absence of PE, not chargeable to tax in India.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 4

Part C : Tribunal & AAR International Tax Decisions



Goldcrest Exports v. ITO

(2010) TII 124 ITAT-Mum.-Intl.

Article 5, 7(1) of India-UK DTAA;

S. 9(1) of Income-tax Act

A.Y. : 2005-06. Dated : 7-9-2010

10. Compensation received by UK buyer pursuant to
arbitration award, on account of failure of Indian entity to meet its export
obligation — Business income — In absence of PE, not chargeable to tax in India.

Interest on arbitration award has the same
character as the underlying compensation.

The Indian payer has no obligation to deduct tax at
source.

Facts :

The taxpayer (GCE) was engaged in the business of
export/import and trading in various commodities. Through the involvement of an
Indian broker, GCE entered into contract with the UK buyer (UKCO) for supply of
certain commodities. GCE cancelled the contract. Pursuant to arbitration
proceedings initiated by UKCO, the arbitrators awarded compensation to UKCO. The
compensation was based on the difference between market price of the commodities
agreed to be supplied and the contracted price. GCE was also asked to pay
interest from the date of arbitration award till the date of payment.

GCE made provision in respect of the compensation
and the interest payable and claimed that as business expenditure.

The tax authorities denied the deduction primarily
on the ground that no tax was deducted at source in respect of the provision.

Held :

The ITAT held that :

(i) The compensation was in the nature of
business income as it was arising out of the trading contract between GCE and
UKCO. Hence, it was covered under Article 7 of the DTAA.

(ii) In absence of PE of UKCO in India, there was
no tax liability. Consequently, there was no tax withholding obligation on GCE.
Involvement of an independent agent in India does not alter the position.

(iii) Compensation payable pursuant to
arbitration award loses its original character and assumes the character of a
judgment debt. Interest payable also partakes the character of compensation.

levitra

Interest paid directly to shareholders by taxpayer’s PE is allowable as a deduction while computing taxable profits of PE in India.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 3

Part C : Tribunal & AAR International Tax Decisions



Besix Kier Dabhol, SA v. DDIT

ITA No. 4249/Mum./07

Article 7(3)(b), of India-Belgium DTAA

S. 36(1)(iii) of Income-tax Act

A.Y. : 2002-03. Datede : 10-11-2010

9. Interest paid directly to shareholders by
taxpayer’s PE is allowable as a deduction while computing taxable profits of PE
in India.

Currently, ITA or DTAA does not contain any
anti-abuse provisions on thin capitalisation. In absence of specific
restriction, deduction of interest on loan paid by taxpayer’s PE to its
shareholders is allowable.

Facts :

The taxpayer, a Belgian company, was constituted as
a joint venture (between Belgium and UK shareholder contributing to equity
capital in 60 : 40 ratio). It was set up for construction of a fuel jetty in
India. The operations were intended to be carried out through the taxpayer’s
project office (PE in terms of Article 5 of DTAA) situated in India. To fund the
project, taxpayer raised debt funds from its two shareholders, in the same ratio
as their equity stake in the JV i.e., 60 : 40. The loan resulted in
significantly high debt-equity ratio of 248 : 1 for the taxpayer.

The taxpayer claimed interest payments on such
borrowed funds as deductible expense in computing profits of PE.

Relying on Article 7(3)(b) of the DTAA, the Tax
Authority, disallowed the interest payments by equating the same to payments
made by a branch to its HO.

Held :

On the following grounds, the ITAT held that
interest paid directly to shareholders would be allowable as a deduction :

(i) The taxable entity is the Belgian company
(i.e., taxpayer) and not the Indian PE, even though tax liability of the
taxpayer is confined to profits attributed to its PE in India.

(ii) The profits attributable to the Indian PE
are required to be computed under normal accounting principles and in terms of
general provisions of the ITA. This accounting approach has been approved by
the Supreme Court in Hyundai Heavy Ind Ltd.2

(iii) Since the only business carried out by the
assessee is the project in India, its entire profits are taxable in India and
all expenses incurred to earn such income are deductible in computing its
taxable income.

(iv) A company and its shareholders have a
separate existence as well as identity and contracts between a company and its
shareholders are just as enforceable as contracts with any independent person.
The limitation contained under Article 7(3)(b) restricts deduction for
interest paid to HO (except for banking companies), unless it is for
reimbursement of actual expenses. In the current case, interest has been paid
to an outside party i.e., shareholders. Hence, the limitation in Article
7(3)(b) cannot apply.

(v) Thin capitalisation rules have been resorted
to by various jurisdictions in order to protect themselves against erosion in
their legitimate tax base by financing a disproportionate ratio of debts.
Belgium also has thin capitalisation rules which restrict interest deduction
if the debt-equity ratio exceeds 1 : 7. In India, the proposed DTC 2010 seeks
to provide for remedial legislative framework to counter erosion of tax base
under General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR) by permitting re-characterisation of
debt into equity. Currently however, India does not have any thin
capitalisation rules and there cannot be adverse implications on that count.

(vi) Merely because a suitable limitation
provision is considered desirable and attempts are being made to legislate
anti-abuse provisions, it would not render the effort to take advantage of
exiting provision of the DTAA illegal.

 

levitra

The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Microsoft Corporation, US & its affiliates (2010 TII 141 ITAT-Del.-Intl.), recently adjudicated on the issue whether the use of or the right to use (including the granting of licence), in respect of computer program, amou

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 3

Part C : Tribunal & AAR International Tax Decisions


 

8. Microsoft Corporation v. ADIT

ITA No 1331 to 1336 of 2008

Article 12(3) of India-US DTAA

S. 9(1)(vi) of Income-tax Act

A.Ys. : 1999-00 to 2004-05. Dated : 26-10-2010

Reliance Industries Ltd.

(2010) TII 154 ITAT-Mum.-Intl.

Article 12(3) of India-US DTAA

S. 9(1)(vi) of Income-tax Act

Dated : 29-10-2010

The Delhi Tribunal in the case of Microsoft
Corporation, US & its affiliates (2010 TII 141 ITAT-Del.-Intl.), recently
adjudicated on the issue whether the use of or the right to use (including the
granting of licence), in respect of computer program, amounts to royalty or
business profits (sale of copyrighted articles). In this case, the software
copies were sold/delivered to Indian distributors, who in turn, sold these
products to re-sellers/end users in India. Microsoft Corporation, being the
registered owner of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in Microsoft software,
entered into an end-user licence agreement, directly with end-users. The
Tribunal, having regard to various agreements, observed that a copyrighted
article cannot be treated as a product, and the payments made are for the
licence granted in the copyright and other IPRs in the product, and will amount
to ‘royalty’ under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the India-US tax treaty.

However, in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd, on
the issue of whether consideration paid to a US resident for licensing of
computer software would be in the nature of ‘royalty’, the Mumbai Tribunal held
that the payment was for the purchase of a copyrighted article and not the
copyright itself. Furthermore, the Mumbai Tribunal stated that it is incorrect
to hold that computer software on a media continues to be an intellectual
property right. Therefore, the payment made for the purchase of software cannot
be termed as ‘royalty’.

levitra

Sale of goods to non-AEs cannot be taken as comparable under CUP, if there are significant differences in quantity sold, geography and customer profiles.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 3

Part C : Tribunal & AAR International Tax Decisions


 

ACIT v. Dufon Laboratories

(2010) TII 26 ITAT-Mum.-TP

S. 92C of Income-tax Act

A.Y. : 2004-05. Dated : 26-3-2010

7. Sale of goods to non-AEs cannot be taken as
comparable under CUP, if there are significant differences in quantity sold,
geography and customer profiles.

Facts :

An Indian company (ICO) was engaged in the business
of processing and export of chemicals. ICO sold majority of its products to its
AE in the USA. A small quantity (constituting about 2.5% of overall sale) was
sold to small enterprises in Asia. The independent parties were small-time
buyers who bought in small quantities for resale to other laboratories. However,
AE in USA purchased large quantities and resold to big corporate houses. Resale
by AE was in the competitive markets of USA and Europe.

The average price charged by ICO to AE worked out
to Rs. 440 per kg. as against the average price of Rs. 617 per kg. charged to
non-AE.

Rejecting the taxpayer’s contention that the sale
price to non-AEs was not the right basis for comparable price, the tax officer
made adjustment by adopting the transfer price based on average realisation from
non-AEs.

Incidentally, the assessee had a profit margin of
about 49% even without taking into account the adjustment, whereas the AE in the
USA had incurred losses.

Held :

Considering the following factors, the ITAT held
that the transaction with AEs was on ALP :

  •   The turnover
    quantity to AEs was more than 50 times that of the non-AEs. Such difference in
    magnitude would have major bearing on the price.


  • In Ranbaxy
    Laboratories Ltd. v. ACIT1, ITAT had held that a particular entity in a
    particular country should be compared with a similar entity in the same
    country as geographical situations would, in several ways, influence transfer
    pricing.


  •   Transactions with
    high-profile clients with which AE dealt were different when compared to small
    sales to non-AEs, who were small players in South East Asian business. Also,
    AEs dealt in competitive market.


  •   The adjustment was
    not justified also on the ground that it resulted in transfer price being
    higher compared to the price recovered by AEs from the independent customers.



levitra

On facts, certain services rendered from outside India were not made available and hence, the consideration was not FIS under Article 12. Also, such offshore services could not be linked to PE in India for determining income attributable to the PE.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2



  1. DIT v. Scientific Atlanta Inc.,



(2009) 33 SOT 220 (Mum.)

Articles 7, 12, India-USA DTAA

A.Y. : 1998-99. Dated : 3-7-2009

Issue :

On facts, certain services rendered from outside India were
not made available and hence, the consideration was not FIS under Article 12.
Also, such offshore services could not be linked to PE in India for
determining income attributable to the PE.

Facts :

The appellant was a tax resident of USA. It had entered
into a VSAT Agreement with an Indian company to provide Satellite Network
Communication System together with the installation and commissioning services
associated with the initial installation. During the relevant year, the
appellant earned income from various sources. It furnished item-wise detail of
the income and also the reasons for taxability or non-taxability of such
income. The appellant contended that two items of income – Project Management
& Engineering Support and Factory Acceptance Tax (‘PMES&FT’) were not taxable
because they pertained to the provision of administrative and technical
services from outside India which were provided to facilitate timely execution
of the project. Further, although such services were technical they were not
‘fees for included services’ (‘FIS’) under Article 12 of India-USA DTAA as
they did not make available any technical knowledge, experience, etc. Hence,
the income from these services would qualify as ‘business income’ and would be
governed by Article 7. The appellant stated that even though it had PE in
India for rendering installation services, income from PMES&FT was not
attributable to that PE as the services were not performed in India.

The AO did not accept contentions of the appellant. After
discussing the nature of the services in his order, the AO held that these
‘hybrid services’ were performed by the appellant to provide Satellite Network
Communication System. He further observed that when a series of technical
works/services were performed to achieve a desired result, the nature of such
works/services should be analysed in connection with the end results. He held
that, alternatively, PMES&FT consisted of development and transfer of a
technical plan or technical design. The AO concluded that in either case, the
services were in the nature of FIS subject to Article 12 of India-USA DTAA and
taxable @15%.

In appeal, the CIT(A) held that: the appellant did not make
available technology, skill, etc.; the services were inextricably and
essentially linked to the supply of equipment and should therefore take the
same character as the supply of the equipment. He also noted that since PMES&FT
services were not FIS, the income would be ‘business income’ and under Article
7, only income relatable to PE could be taxed in India. Therefore, he held
that as the services were performed outside India, income from those services
was not attributable to the PE.

Held :

To understand scope and meaning of the term ‘make
available’, the Tribunal referred to the decisions in Intertek Testing
Services India P. Ltd., In re
(2008) 307 ITR 418 (AAR) and Mahindra &
Mahindra Ltd. v. DCIT,
(2009) 30 SOT 374 (Mum.) (SB) and observed that the
AO had interpreted ‘make available’ in an erroneous manner. It held that by
rendering PMES&FT services from outside India, the appellant did not ‘make
available’ any technical knowledge, skill etc. and as such Article 12 did not
apply. Hence, the consideration cannot be treated as FIS.

Where a taxpayer has a PE in India, under Article 7(1),
business profits can be taxed in India only to the extent they are
attributable to the PE in India. As the consideration was received for
rendering services outside no part of the services rendered from outside India
could be linked to the PE in India for determining income attributable to the
PE in India.

 

levitra

Unlike sub-clause (ii), sub-clause (i) of S. 245N(a) does not specifically restrict the scope to the tax liability of a non-resident and hence, advance ruling could also be in relation to a transaction by a non-resident even if it does not involve determi

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2



  1. Umicore Finance, In re




(2009) 318 ITR 78 (AAR)

S. 245N(a), Income-tax Act

Dated : 7-7-2009

Issue :

Unlike sub-clause (ii), sub-clause (i) of S. 245N(a) does
not specifically restrict the scope to the tax liability of a non-resident and
hence, advance ruling could also be in relation to a transaction by a
non-resident even if it does not involve determination of tax liability of
non-resident.

Facts :

The applicant was a Luxembourg company. It had entered into
a transaction for purchase of the entire equity capital of an Indian company.
The Indian company was originally formed as a partnership and later registered
itself as a company under Part IX of the Companies Act, 1956. In terms of S.
47(xiii) of the Act, if more than 50% of the voting power in the company
continues to be held by the erstwhile partners of the partnership for a period
of not less than 5 years, no capital gain is chargeable. However, pursuant to
the transfer of shares, the erstwhile partners would not have held more than
50% of the shares for a period of not less than 5 years and therefore, the
relevant condition would be violated.

The AAR observed that, prima facie, the
determination sought by the applicant was in relation to the tax liability of
an Indian company and hence, it was doubtful whether the non-resident
applicant can seek advance ruling on this question. In response to the notice
issued by the AAR, the applicant stated that due to certain stipulations in
the Share Purchase Agreement, unless capital gains tax payable by the acquired
Indian company is determined, purchase consideration payable by the applicant
cannot be determined. Further, its obligation to provide the audited financial
statements of the acquired Indian company was also dependent on the
determination of capital gains tax liability. The applicant contended that the
ruling sought was within the definition of ‘advance ruling’ in sub-clause (i)
of S. 245N(a) of the Act.

Held :

In contrast to the language in sub-clause (ii), the
language in sub-clause (i) of S. 245N(a) of the Act is wider. Unlike
sub-clause (ii), sub-clause (i) does not have any specific requirement that
determination should relate to the tax liability of a non-resident. Due to the
stipulations in the Share Purchase Agreement, capital gains tax arising in
case of the acquired Indian company has a direct and substantial impact on the
applicant, the question raised by the applicant falls within the definition of
‘advance ruling’ in S. 245N(a) of the Act.

 

levitra

In view of Explanation 1 in S. 90, higher rate of tax applicable to foreign company cannot be said to be discriminatory.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2



  1. JCIT v.
    State Bank of Mauritius Ltd.



(2009 TIOL ITAT Mum.)

S. 37, Income-tax Act;

Articles 7, 24, India-Mauritius DTAA

A.Y. : 1997-98. Dated : 16-10-2009

Issues :


(i) In view of Explanation 1 in S. 90, higher rate of
tax applicable to foreign company cannot be said to be discriminatory.


(ii) In view of absence of ‘subject to limitation under
domestic law’ provision in Article 7(3) of India-Mauritius DTAA, restrictions
under Income tax Act on allowance of travel, entertainment, etc. expenses do
not apply.

Facts :

The appellant was a Mauritius company. It had a PE in
India.

In accordance with the provisions of the Finance Act,
stipulating 55% as the rate of tax applicable to a foreign company, the AO
sought to tax the income of the appellant @ 55%. The appellant contended that
in terms of Article 24, which provides for non-discrimination, its status was
equivalent to domestic company as defined in S. 2(22A) of the Act and hence,
the rate of tax should be 40%, as applicable to a domestic company. However,
relying on the ruling of AAR in Societe Generale (1999) 236 ITR 103 (AAR), the
AO applied tax rate of 55%.

The PE had incurred certain travelling and entertainment
expenditure. While assessing the income, the AO restricted the allowance of
expenditure by applying limitation provisions of S. 37(2) of the Act. The
appellant contended that such restriction cannot be enforced as
India-Mauritius DTAA did not incorporate such restriction.

In appeal, the CIT(A) accepted the contention of the
appellant and upheld that :

(a) The rate of tax applicable to the income of the
appellant should be the same as that applicable to a domestic company and

(b) The restriction u/s.37(2) cannot be enforced.


Held :

On appeal by the department, the ITAT held as under :

(i) Applicable rate of tax :

The Finance Act 2001 inserted Explanation 1 in S. 90 with
retrospective effect from 1st April 1962. The said Explanation provides that
in case of a foreign company, the charge of tax at a rate higher than that in
case of a domestic company shall not be regarded as less favourable. In
Chohung Bank v. DDIT,
(2006) 102 ITD 45 (Mum.), the Tribunal has also
taken similar view. Following the said decision and the amended S. 90, the
rate of tax should be the higher rate applicable to a foreign company.

(ii) As regards limitation on allowance of
expenditures :


Unlike the ‘subject to the limitations of the taxation laws
of that Contracting State’ provision normally incorporated in Article 7 of
most DTAAs, Article 7(3) of India-Mauritius DTAA does not incorporate such
restriction. Therefore, restriction provided in S. 37(2) of the Act cannot be
enforced. The ITAT took note of provision of India France treaty to conclude
that restriction of income computation as per provisions of the Act needs to
be specifically agreed upon.


levitra

No expenditure/allowance can be deducted from royalty/FTS income earned by non resident pursuant to agreement entered into prior to 1st April 2003.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 2



  1. DDIT v. Pipeline Engineering GmbH (2009) 125
    TTJ 534 (Mum.)



S. 44D, S. 44DA, S. 115A, Income-tax Act;

Articles 7, 12, India-Germany DTAA

A.Y. : 2000-01 & 2001-02. Dated : 19-12-2008

Issues :


(i) No expenditure/allowance can be deducted from
royalty/FTS income earned by non resident pursuant to agreement entered into
prior to 1st April 2003.


(ii) S. 44DA does not have retrospective effect.


(iii) Authority to read down a provision vests only in a
High Court or Supreme Court.


(iv) As Article 12(5) [dealing with royalty/FTS
effectively connected with PE] excludes applicability of Article 12(1) and
(2), cap on rate of tax in Article 12(2) cannot apply.

Facts :


The appellant was a German company, and also a tax resident
of Germany. It was engaged in the business of providing engineering
consultancy services for oil and gas pipelines transmission systems. The
appellant had set up a PE in India. It entered into an agreement with an
Indian company for providing consultancy services. The agreement was entered
into before April 1, 2003
1.
Pursuant to the agreement, the appellant had earned royalty/fees for technical
services (‘FTS’) through its PE in India. The appellant had offered entire
income for tax in terms of S. 44D of the Act without claiming deduction of any
expenses. In the subsequent year, the appellant claimed that in terms of
Article 12(2) of India-Germany DTAA, tax should be chargeable @10% instead of
20% and further that the income should be computed after deduction of expenses
incurred by the PE. It also claimed that although the fees were within the
scope of Article 12, by virtue of Article 12(5), they should be treated as
business profits and subjected to Article 7. Thus, the income should be
computed after allowing expenses of the PE.

The AO concluded that the allowance of expenditure of PE
was subject to S. 44D of the Act and hence no deduction could be allowed.
Further, in terms of S. 115A, the income should be taxable @20%. The CIT(A)
upheld the Order of the AO.

Before the Tribunal, the appellant contended that :



  •  As the
    taxpayer had incurred loss in its Indian operations carried through PE, as
    per Article 7(3) of India-Germany DTAA read with S. 44D and S. 115A of the
    Act, its income cannot be taxed @20% of the gross receipts.



  •  If
    Article 7(3) is applied, actual expenses incurred for earning income should
    be allowed and hence question of invoking S. 44D cannot arise.



  •  Once the
    income is to be computed as business profits, provisions of S. 44D relating
    to royalty would not apply.



  •  The
    intention of insertion of S. 44DA was to harmonise the provisions of the Act
    and the DTAA, to bring non-resident on par with resident as regards taxation
    of royalty or FTS. S. 44DA is a clarificatory provision to be applied
    retrospectively.



  •  The
    taxpayer had choice of being assessed as per Article 12, in which case, the
    gross receipts would be taxed @10% without deduction of any expenditure.



Held :


(i) Allowance of expenses and deductions :


S. 44D as amended was applicable for computing royalty or
FTS received by the non-resident in pursuance of an agreement made before 1st
April 2003. The non-obstante clause in S. 44D(b) specifically provides that no
expenditure or allowance shall be allowed while computing income by way of
royalty or FTS. Hence, no deduction would be allowed even if the income is to
be computed under Article 7 of DTAA which requires computation of income to be
done in accordance with provisions of the Act.

(ii) Reading down the provisions of S. 44D :


The theory of reading down the provisions of the statute
can be applied only when such provision is violative of fundamental right.
Only the High Court or the Supreme Court can decide such issue and, if
necessary, apply the theory of reading down.

(iii) S. 44DA being clarificatory and having retrospective effect :


The Finance Act 2003 completely changed the scheme of
taxation of royalty or FTS. Hence, provisions of S. 44DA cannot be regarded as
clarificatory.

(iv) Non-discrimination article and its impact :


Article 24 of India-Germany DTAA is in two parts. The first
part provides that income of non-resident through a PE shall not be less
favourably taxed than that of a resident. The second part of Article 24 carves
out an exception to provide that limitation on deductibility of expenses in
computation of PE profit in accordance with provisions of the Act is not
protected by non discrimination article. As a result, Article 24(2) does not
affect operation of S. 44D of the Act.

(v) Applicable rate of tax :


As the recipient has PE in India and as income is
effectively connected with PE in India, such income is covered by provisions
of Article 12(5). In such situation, royalties or FTS received by non-resident
would be governed by Article 7 and paragraphs (1) and (2) of Article 12 are
expressly made non-applicable. The income is therefore to be treated as
business profits to be computed as per domestic law. Once paragraph (5) of
Article 12 excludes applicability of paragraphs (1) & (2), the cap in respect
of rate of tax in paragraph (2) cannot be applied. Hence, in terms of S. 115A,
the applicable rate of tax would be 20%.


Interest on fully convertible bonds till date of conversion, taxable in India as interest.

fiogf49gjkf0d

New Page 1

Part C — International Tax Decisions



7 LMN India Limited


In re
[No. 769 of 2007] (AAR)

S. 2(28A), S. 90 of IT Act; Article 11 of India-USA DTAA

Dated : 10-10-2008

Issue :

Interest paid to a non-resident investor on fully and
compulsorily convertible bonds till the date of conversion is taxable in India
as interest.

Facts :

The applicant, a non-banking financial company of India, had
issued fully convertible bonds to LMCC of USA.

As per the Bond Subscription Agreement :

(a) The bonds were convertible into equity shares at the
end of five years from the date of issue.

(b) Interest was payable on the bonds on half-yearly basis,
irrespective of whether the applicant made profits or not.

(c) Until conversion, the bonds were to be treated as debt
instruments.

(d) The bonds ranked in priority to equity shares in the
event of winding-up/liquidation of the applicant-company.

(e) Upon conversion, the equity shares issued were to rank
pari passu with the existing equity shares.


The basic issue before the AAR was about tax implications and
consequential withholding tax obligation in respect of interest paid/payable to
the investor up to the date of conversion of bonds into equity shares.

Held :

Payment made to LMCC of USA up to the date of conversion of
bonds into equity shares was held to be interest in terms of definition of
‘interest’ u/s. 2(28A) of the IT Act as well as under the India-USA DTAA.

The AAR noted that under the IT Act, the term ‘interest’ is
defined in a broad manner to include interest payable in any manner in respect
of any moneys borrowed or debt incurred. Under the India-USA DTAA, it is defined
to mean income from debt claims of every kind, including income from bonds or
debentures.

Payment of interest pre-supposes borrowal of money or the
incurring of a debt. Raising of funds by means of fully convertible debenture is
a well-known commercial and business practice. Debenture creates or recognises
existence of a debt which remains to be so till it is repaid or discharged.

The convertibility of debentures does not affect its
characteristic feature of being a debt. The AAR held that conversion was the
mode of discharging the debentures and the debt would be extinguished on handing
over the fully-paid equity shares at the agreed price and at the agreed time to
the bondholder. The Supreme Court’s decisions in the case of CWT v. Spencer &
Co.,
(1973) 88 ITR 429 (SC) and Eastern Investments Ltd. v. CIT,
(1951) 20 ITR 1 (SC) were relied upon to support the proposition.

levitra

L o n d o n S t a r D i a m o n d C o m p a n y ( I ) P . L t d . vs. D C I T In the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Vijay Pal Rao, (J. M.) and D. Karunakara Rao, (A. M.) I.T.A. No.6169/M/2012 Assessment Year: 2009-2010. Date of Order: 11.10.2013 Counsel for Assessee/Revenue: Soli Dastur and Nikhil Ranjan/Dipak Ripote

fiogf49gjkf0d
Section 43(5) – Loss on forward exchange contracts held as incidental to export activity hence allowed as business loss.

Facts:
The assessee is engaged in the business of trading and manufacturing of rough and polished diamonds. It had entered into forward contracts with the banker to safeguard against the exchange fluctuations of export considerations/sale profits as per RBI guidelines. Total of forward contracts entered into during the was Rs. 135.99 crore and the cancellation thereof aggregated to Rs. 126.3 crore. The total exports during the year was Rs. 107.57 crore. Total outstanding receivable in foreign exchange was much higher than any of these figures. It filed its return of income declaring the total income of Rs. 35.29 lakh. The AO examined the applicability of the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act in general and clause (c) of the proviso to section 43(5) in particular and held that the foreign exchange contracts constituted speculative transactions under the said provisions and treated the loss on cancellation thereof of Rs. 4.69 crore as the speculation loss and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 5.04 crore. On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO.

Before the tribunal, the revenue relied on the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and contended that the certain data showed that the total of Forward exchange Contracts on certain dates were more than the exports receivable and also questioned the asssessee‘s failure to demonstrate the paisa to paisa and date-wise correlation between the Forward Contracts and the Export Invoices.

Held:
The tribunal laid down the following principles:

• Considering the judgment of the Calcutta High court in the case of CIT vs. Sooraj Muill Magarmull (129 ITR 169) which was followed by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Badridas Gauridu Pvt. Ltd. (261  ITR 256), it held that the Forward Contracts are commodities falling in the definition of speculative transactions governed u/s. 43(5);

• Forward exchange contracts when entered into with the banks for hedging the losses due to foreign exchange fluctuations on the export proceeds, are to be considered integral or incidental to the export activity of the assessee and therefore, the losses or gains constituted the business loss or gains and not the speculation activities. For the purpose it relied on the decisions of the Mumbai tribunal in the case of D. Kishorekumar and Co. (2 SOT 769), the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. (supra) and the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sooraj Muill Magarmull (supra).

The tribunal then noted that the loss suffered by the assessee on account of the cancellation of forward exchange contract was broadly of two types viz., loss suffered on cancellation of matured contracts (Rs. 4.15 crore) and loss suffered on cancellation of pre-matured contracts (Rs. 64 lakh). According to the tribunal, the former being related to the Forward exchange contracts which are integral or incidental to the exports of the diamonds, should be allowed as business loss in view of the binding High Court or Tribunal decisions/ judgments in the case of D. Kishore kumar and Co (supra), Badridas Gauridu Pvt. Ltd. (supra), Sooraj Muill Magarmull, (supra). In the case of loss suffered on cancellation of pre-matured contracts, the tribunal observed that the onus is on the assessee to explain satisfactorily why the assessee resorted to premature cancellation of some FCs. Further, it observed that it is not required that there must be 1:1 precise correlation between Forward exchange Contacts and the corresponding export invoice. So long as the total Contracts does not exceed the exports of the year plus outstanding export receivable, the Forward exchange Contracts can constitute hedging transaction‘. In the case of loss suffered on cancellation of pre-matured contracts, the tribunal allowed the loss of Rs. 42 lakh accepting the explanation of the assessee that the maturity date of those contracts fell during the weekend days and therefore, the assessee cancelled the contracts three days prior to the due date. As regards the other contracts cancelled prior to longer than three days it held that losses therefrom should also be allowed as business loss so long as the same are integral part of the exports. However, according to it, the assessee needs to answer as to why it went for premature termination and the onus was on the assessee as per the ratio of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Josef John (67 ITR 74). Accordingly, to examine this part of the loss, the matter was remanded to the AO.

levitra

Green Infra Ltd. vs. ITO ITAT Mumbai `G’ Bench Before D. Manmohan (VP) and N. K. Billaiya (AM) ITA No. 7762/Mum/2012 A.Y.: 2009-10. Decided on: 23rd August, 2013. Counsel for assessee/revenue: Porus Kaka/ Abha Kala Chanda.

fiogf49gjkf0d
S/s. 56, 68. Share premium being a capital receipt cannot be charged to tax as income.

Facts:
In the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that an amount of Rs. 47,97,10,000 was credited under Share Premium. He observed that the assessee company was incorporated on 03-04-2008 and had collected share premium of Rs. 47,97,10,000 on allotment of shares of face value of Rs. 10 each at a premium of Rs. 490 per share. He asked the assessee interalia to justify the premium charged with specific reference to basis of valuation, furnish note on factors considered for allotting shares at a premium.

The assessee filed a detailed reply explaining that the subscribers to the Memorandum of Association have subscribed to 50,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each amounting to Rs. 5,00,000. These shares were allotted at par and all remaining shares were allotted at a premium. The Companies Act, 1956 does not specify the price at which shares are to be issued. Also, it does not limit the premium at which shares are to be issued. Share premium is a capital receipt and has to be dealt with in accordance with section 78 of the Companies Act, 1956. The assessee also filed internal valuation report which was obtained prior to issuance of equity shares at a premium. It was also contended that the assessee company is not required to prove the genuineness, purpose or justification for charging premium on shares. As regards chargeability of share premium u/s. 56(1), it was submitted that the share premium being a capital receipt is not income in its ordinary sense.

The AO was of the belief that premium charged on allotment is not justified. He was of the opinion that these funds were introduced by the assessee through the shareholders in the guise of share premium. He held that there is no basis for the estimates made in the valuations and that the values adopted are nowhere near to the actual and achievements. He also observed that the assessee did not have any hidden assets in the form of patents, copy rights, intellectual property rights or even investments, etc belonging to the company based on which the assessee would be likely to substantially enhance its profits. He also observed that of the total receipts of Rs. 47,97,10,000 an amount of Rs. 45,36,95,212 was invested in units of IDFC Mutual Fund and balance amounts were utilised for investments in shares of subsidiary companies, bank FDRs, advances to subsidiaries, etc. He held that the assessee has entered into a sham transaction. Accordingly, he invoked the provisions of section 56(1) of the Act and taxed the share premium under the head `Income from Other Sources’.

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to CIT(A) who confirmed the action of the AO.

Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal where the capital structure of the assessee company was explained. It was explained that IDFC Private Equity Fund-II is holding 98% shares in the assessee company and almost all the Directors of the assessee company are related with IDFC group.

Held: The Tribunal noted that the transaction of issue of shares at such a premium by a zero balance sheet company could raise eye brows but considering the subscribers to the assessee company, the test for the genuineness of the transaction goes into oblivion. It observed that 10,19,000 equity shares were subscribed and allotted to IDFC PE Fund II which company is a Front Manager of IDFC Ltd., in which company Government of India is holding 18% of shares. The contributors to IDFC PE Fund-II who is subscriber to the assessee’s share capital, are LIC, Union of India, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Indian Overseas Bank and Canara Bank all of which are public sector undertakings. Therefore, to raise eye brows to a transaction where there is so much involvement of the Government directly or indirectly does not make any sense.

No doubt a non-est company or a zero balance company asking for a share premium of Rs. 490 per share defies all commercial prudence but at the same time we cannot ignore the fact that it is a prerogative of the Board of Directors of a company to decide the premium amount and it is the wisdom of the shareholders whether they want to subscribe to such a heavy premium. The Revenue authorities cannot question the charging of such huge premium without any bar from any legislated law of the land. Details of subscribers were before the Revenue authorities. The AO has also confirmed the transaction from the subscribers by issuing notice u/s 133(6) of the Act. The Board of Directors contains persons who are associated with IDFC group of companies, therefore their integrity and credibility cannot be doubted. The entire grievance of the Revenue revolves around the charging of such huge premium so much so that the revenue authorities did not even blink their eyes in invoking provisions of section 56(1) of the Act.

Having gone through the provisions of section 56(1), the Tribunal held that the emphasis in section 56(1) is on `income of every kind’, therefore, to tax any amount under this section, it must have some character of “income”. It is settled proposition of law that capital receipts, unless specifically taxed under any provisions of the Act, are excluded from income. The Supreme Court has laid down the ratio that share premium realised from the issue of shares is of capital nature and forms part of share capital of the company and therefore cannot be taxed as revenue receipt. It is also a settled proposition of law that any expenditure incurred for the expansion of capital base of a company is to be treated as a capital expenditure as has been held by the SC in the case of Punjab State Industrial Corporation vs. CIT 225 ITR 792 and in the case of Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs. CIT. Thus the expenditure and receipts directly relating to the share capital of a company are capital in nature and therefore cannot be taxed u/s. 56(1) of the Act.

In the course of hearing, the DR raised the plea that the nature of transaction should be judged from the parameters of section 68 as well. Though, the counsel of the assessee raised a strong objection to such a plea, the Tribunal in the interest of justice and fair play, drawing support from the decision of SC in Kapurchand Shrimal vs. CIT (131 ITR 451) allowed the DR to raise this issue.

Considering the arguments of the DR, the Tribunal held that the identity of the subscribers has been established beyond all reasonable doubts nor have the revenue authorities questioned the identity of the shareholders. On facts, it held that the capacity of the shareholders cannot be doubted. To counter the argument of the Revenue that charging of premium of Rs. 490 per share is beyond any logical sense and that the transaction is a sham transaction, the Tribunal looked at the application of the funds so raised. It held that the ultimate beneficiaries of the share premium may clear the clouds over the transaction being alleged to be a sham.

The Tribunal fund that the assessee company invested funds in its three subsidiary companies wherein the assessee is holding 99.88% of share capital which meant that the funds were not diverted to an outsider. This, according to the Tribunal, cleared the doubt about the application of funds and the credibility of the company in whom the funds were invested.

The Tribunal held that it could not find a single evidence which could lead to the entire transaction to be a sham. It held that the revenue authorities erred in treating the share premium as income of the assessee u/s. 56(1) of the Act. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 47,91,00,000.

This ground of appeal filed by the assessee was allowed.

levitra

Umaben Shaileshbhai Sheth vs. DCWT ITAT Ahmedabad `D’ Bench Before A. Mohan Alankamony (AM) and Kul Bharat (JM) ITA No. 44 to 49/Ahd/2010 A.Y.: 2000-01 to 2005-06. Decided on: 4th October, 2013. Counsel for assessee/revenue: Vijay Ranjan/K. C. Mathews.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Proviso to section 5(1)(vi) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. If the assessee’s share in the plot of land is less than 500 sq. mts., the benefit of the proviso cannot be denied to the assessee on the ground that the area of the entire plot is more than 500 sq. mts.

Facts: The assessee had joint share in a plot of land, admeasuring 567 sq. mts., allotted by Urmi Society, along with her husband. She was a joint shareholder as well. The Assessing Officer (AO) accepted that the assessee is the owner of half portion of the land but he denied the benefit of exemption to section 5(1)(vi) in an order passed u/s 24 r.w.s. 17 r.w.s. 16(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (WT Act).

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to the CWT(A) who dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee and her husband had disclosed the value of the plot of land in their taxable wealth while filing returns of net wealth for AYs 2006- 07 and 2007-08 and therefore, how can the value of the said plot be exempt in earlier years. He held that the market value of the plot of land allotted by Urmi Society is includible in taxable wealth.

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal.

Held: The Tribunal noted that the CWT(A) had not given any basis as to how the proviso to section 5(1)(vi) is not applicable when there is a finding of fact by the AO that the assessee is treated owner of land less than 500 sq. mts. The only basis of denial of exemption by the CWT(A) was that the assessee had not filed the wealth-tax return for the earlier period. The Revenue had not placed reliance on any judicial pronouncement or on any provision of law to deny exemption. It further noted that as per proviso to section 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act, if plot of land is comprising an area of 500 sq. mts or less then no wealth-tax shall be payable by an assessee.

The Tribunal held that admittedly, the assessee has been treated as owner of one-half share in a plot of land admeasuring 567 sq. mts, therefore the right of the assessee is lesser than 500 sq. mts. The assessee cannot be fastened with a liability of tax which otherwise cannot be fastened under the WT Act. It held that on this piece of land, no wealth-tax is payable by the assessee in terms of proviso to section 5(1)(vi). It held that the CWT(A) erred in not granting exemption under proviso to section 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act. It directed the AO to allow exemption.

The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed.

levitra

ITO vs. Pritesh D. Shah (HUF) ITAT Ahmedabad `B’ Bench Before G. C. Gupta (VP) and T. R. Meena (AM) ITA No. 175/Ahd/2013

fiogf49gjkf0d
S/s. 40(a)(ia), 194C, 194IA – Provisions of S/s. 194C, 194IA are not applicable to amounts paid by Clearing & Forwarding Agent, on behalf of his client, receipts whereof are issued in the name of the client.

Facts:
The assessee, a clearing & forwarding agent, had charged service charges known as agency charges from its clients whose goods were exported through various ports mainly in Gujarat & Maharashtra. In respect of the amounts paid by the assessee on behalf of its clients, receipts whereof were issued by the recipients in the name of the clients, the assessee did not deduct tax at source. The assessee contended that it was merely a facilitator in the export business of its clients. The assessee received from its clients reimbursement of amounts paid on their behalf and also service charges/agency charges. It was only the agency charges which were credited as income to P&L account of the assessee.

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 1,69,11,269; Rs. 23,01,424 and Rs. 26,76,785 u/s. 40(a) (ia) r.w.s. 194C & 194I of the Act on the ground that the assessee had failed to deduct tax at source on payments made by it on behalf of its clients.

Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal to CIT(A) who allowed the appeal.

Aggrieved, the revenue preferred an appeal to the Tribunal.

Held:
The Tribunal noted that the assessee received railway freight, shipping freight, ICD charges, etc from its clients by way of reimbursement of expenses. It held that the assessee is merely a facilitator in the export business of its clients and facilitates to and fro movement of client’s goods both in land and overseas using road, rail, air and sea routes including temporary storage of the goods in custom bonded warehbouse for legal and procedural purposes, etc. The assessee received reimbursement of expenses incurred and also service charges. The Tribunal noted that the receipts were issued by various parties in the name of clients of the assessee and not in the name of the assessee and that it is only the agency charges which are credited to the P & L account of the assessee.

The Tribunal held that for applicability of provisions of section 194C and section 194I, the relationship of contractor and payee pursuant to contract between the parties is essential. In the facts of the assessee’s case, the Tribunal held that such a relationship is missing.

The Tribunal noted the finding given by CIT(A) that the clients of the assessee are reimbursing monies paid by the assessee to such agencies along with the assessee’s commission or handling charges and also that the CIT(A) has referred to number of decisions where the Hon’ble Courts have held that TDS provisions are not attracted in cases involving reimbursement of expenses held that addition on account of payments made to various parties on behalf of its clients by the assessee could not be sustained and deserves to be deleted. The Tribunal confirmed the order passed by CIT(A).

The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed.

levitra

Business expenditure: TDS: Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia): A. Y. 2009-10: Tax deducted at source on salaries of employees paid by another party on behalf of assessee: Assessee not required to deduct tax on reimbursement to that party: Disallowance u/s. 40(a) (ia) cannot be made:

fiogf49gjkf0d
CIT vs. Victor Shipping Services (P) Ltd.; 357 ITR 642
(All):

In the A. Y. 2009-10, M paid salary to the employees of the assessee on behalf of the assessee and also deducted tax at source as per law. The assessee reimbursed the amount to M. The Assessing Officer disallowed the payment made to M relying on the provisions of section 40(a)(ia), on the ground that no tax was deducted at source on such payment to M. The CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal and held that since M had deducted tax at source on salaries paid by it on behalf of the assessee, the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source on reimbursement made by it to M, and when the expenses incurred by the assessee were totally paid and did not remain payable as at the end of the accounting period, the provisions of section 40(a) (ia) of the Act were not applicable. The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the CIT(A).

On appeal by the Revenue, the Allahabad High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal and held as under:

“i) Tax was deducted at source from the salaries of the employees paid by M, and the circumstances in which such salaries were paid by M for the assessee were sufficiently explained. For disallowing expenses from business and profession on the ground that tax has not been deducted at source, the amount should be payable and not which has been paid by the end of the year.

ii) The Tribunal had not committed any error in recording on facts, and no question of law arose for consideration in appeal.”

levitra

A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 70 dated 8th November, 2013

fiogf49gjkf0d
Third party payments for export/import transactions

This circular permits the payments for export/import of goods/software to be received from third parties, subject to the following conditions:

Export of Goods/Software

a) There must be a firm irrevocable order backed by a tripartite agreement.

b) Third party payment must come from a Financial Action Task Force (FATF) compliant country and through the banking channel only.

c) The exporter must declare the third party remittance  in the Export Declaration Form (EDF).

d) It is the responsibility of the Exporter to realise and repatriate the export proceeds from such third party named in the EDF.

e) Banks will continue reporting of outstandings, if any, in the XOS against the name of the exporter. However, instead of the name of the overseas buyer from where the proceeds have to be realised, the name of the declared third party must appear in the XOS.

f) In case of shipments being made to a country in Group II of Restricted Cover Countries, (e.g. Sudan, Somalia, etc.), payments for the same can be received from an Open Cover Country.

Import Transactions

a) There must be a firm irrevocable purchase order/ tripartite agreement in place.

b) Third party payment must be made to a Financial Action Task Force (FATF) compliant country and through the banking channel only.

c) The Invoice must contain a narration that the related payment has to be made to the third party named therein.

d) Bill of Entry must mention the name of the shipper as also the fact that the related payment has to be made to the third party named therein.

e) Importer has to comply with the related instructions relating to imports including those on advance payment being made for import of goods.

f) The amount of an import transaction eligible for third party payment must not exceed $100,000.

levitra

A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 69 dated 23rd November, 2013

fiogf49gjkf0d
Press Release dated 27th September, 2013 –
Ministry of Finance, Government of India Notification dated October 11,
2013 issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Economic Affairs) –
G.S.R. 684(E)

Amendment to the “Issue of Foreign Currency
Convertible Bonds and Ordinary shares (Through Depository Receipt
Mechanism) Scheme, 1993”

Presently, unlisted Indian
companies that have not yet accessed Global Depository Receipts/Foreign
Currency Convertible Bond route for raising capital in the international
market are required to have prior or simultaneous listing in the
domestic market.

This circular permits, initially for a period
of two years, unlisted companies incorporated in India to raise capital
abroad without prior or subsequent listing in India. The Indian company
must fulfill the following conditions: –

(a) Unlisted Indian
companies can list abroad only on exchanges in IOSCO/FATF compliant
jurisdictions or those jurisdictions with which SEBI has signed
bilateral agreements.

(b) The ADR/GDR can be issued subject to
sectoral cap, entry route, minimum capitalisation norms, pricing norms,
etc. as per FDI regulations notified by the RBI from time to time.

(c)
The pricing of such ADR/GDR has to be determined in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph 6 of Schedule 1 of Notification No. FEMA. 20
dated 3rd May 2000, as amended from time to time.

(d) The number
of underlying equity shares offered for issuance of ADR/GDR that have to
be kept with the local custodian has to be determined upfront and the
ratio of ADR/ GDR to equity shares has to be decided upfront based on
FDI pricing norms of equity shares of unlisted company.

(e) The
unlisted Indian company has to comply with the instructions on
downstream investment as notified by the RBI from time to time.

(f)
The capital raised abroad can be utilised for retiring outstanding
overseas debt or for bona fide operations abroad including for
acquisitions overseas.

(h) In case the funds raised are not
utilised abroad, the company must repatriate the funds to India within
15 days and such money must be parked only with banks recognised by RBI
and can be used for eligible purposes.

(i) The unlisted company will have to file reports with RBI as may be prescribed.

levitra

A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 68 dated 1st November, 2013 Notification No. FEMA.292/2013- RB dated 4th October, 2013, Press Note No. 2 (2013 Series) dated June 3, 2013 – DIPP Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in India – definition of ‘group company’

fiogf49gjkf0d
This circular has modified Notification No. FEMA. 20/2000-RB dated 3rd May 2000, by including the definition of the term ‘group company’ as follows: –

‘Group company’ means two or more enterprises which, directly or indirectly, are in position to:

(i) exercise 26%, or more, of voting rights in other enterprise; or

(ii) appoint more than 50% of members of board of directors in the other enterprise.

levitra

A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 63 dated 18th October, 2013 Memorandum of Procedure for channeling transactions through Asian Clearing Union (ACU)

fiogf49gjkf0d
This circular states that the ACU Board of Directors at their meeting held on 19th June, 2013 have decided to include only transactions involving export/import of goods and services among ACU countries as eligible for payment under the ACU Mechanism. As a result, the old Para 7 and sub-paragraph (b) of Para 8 stands revised as follows: –

 Extant Para 7 and Para 8(b) to the Annex of A.P.(DIR Series) Circular No.35 dated 17th February, 2010

 Revised Para 7 and Para 8 (b) to the Annex of A.P.(DIR Series) Circular No.35 dated 17th February, 2010

 7. Eligible Payments
Transactions that are eligible to be made through ACU are payments –
(a) from a resident in the territory of one participant to a resident in the territory of another participant;
(b) for current international transactions as defined by the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund;
(c) permitted by the country in which the payer resides;
(d) not declared ineligible under paragraph 8 of this Memorandum; and
(e) for export/import transactions between ACU member countries on deferred payment terms.
Note: – Trade transactions with Myanmar may be settled in any freely convertible currency, in addition to the ACU mechanism.
8. Ineligible Payments

(b) payments which are not on account of current international transactions as defined by the International Monetary Fund, except to the extent mutually agreed upon between Reserve Bank and the other participants

 7. Eligible Payments
Transactions that are eligible to be made through ACU are payments –
(a) for export/import transactions between ACU member countries including export and import on deferred payment terms; and
(b) not declared ineligible under paragraph 8 of this
Memorandum
Note: –
Trade transactions with Myanmar may be settled in any freely convertible currency, in addition to the ACU mechanism.
8. Ineligible Payments

(b) payments that are not on account of export/import transactions between ACU members countries except to the extent mutually agreed upon between the Reserve Bank and the other participants

PART C: Information & Around

fiogf49gjkf0d
Public Authority:
Aurangabad Information Commissioner has ruled that Global Towers, a franchisee of the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company (MSEDCL) for Aurangabad city, came within the purview of the Right to Information Act and was bound to provide information to power consumers.

RTI applicant, Hemant kapadia had made an application to Global Towers (GT) which was rejected by it on the ground that it was a private company and the RTI Act did not apply to it. MSEDCL representatives submitted before the Commission that all applications received from consumers under the RTI Act had been forwarded to Global Towers, but it did not respond and so no information could be given to Kapadia.

All along, Global Towers had taken the view that it would provide information to MSEDCL and that there was nothing wrong in denying information to consumers. In some cases, the firm did provide information, but it was submitted to. MSEDCL and not the consumers.

Information Commission ruled that GT had received substantial assistance form MSEDCL and owing to that assistance view the GT was able to perform and provide service. Accordingly, in the view of the Information Commissioner, GT comes under the purview of the RTI Act and is a Public Authority.

Panchayat head:
Bhadresh Vamja, a 21 year-old law student, who tenaciously used Right to Information (RTI) to fight corruption, has been elected as the sarpanch of Saldi village. He is also one of the youngest sarpanchs in the state of Gujarat.

Vamja is the second RTI activist to be elected to village panchayat for empowering people through RTI. Last year, blind activist Ratna Ala was elected as deputy sarpanch of Rangpar village in Surendranagar.

levitra

PART A: order of high court

fiogf49gjkf0d
Address in the RTI application, section 6(2) of the RTI Act:

A short judgment of Calcutta High Court-

RTI Activist, Mr. Avishek Goenka approached the Calcutta H.C. in a writ petition and submitted that the authorities should not insist upon the detailed address of the applicant as and when any application is made under the Right to Information Act.

He stated that giving full address would cause a threat to the activist and in fact there had been past incidents of unnatural deaths of activist in the field, presumably by the interested persons having vested interest to conceal the information that is asked for by the activist.

He submitted that the applicant would provide a particular post-box number that would automatically conceal his identity to the public at large.

The Court considered the relevant provisions of the RTI Act and stated: Section 6(2) of the Right to information Act, 2005 would clearly provide, an applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contacting him.

The court further stated:
Looking to the said provision, we find logic in the submission of the petitioner. When the legislature thought it fit, the applicant need not disclose any personal detail, the authority should not insist upon his detailed whereabouts particularly 

when post-box number is provided for that wouldestablish contact with him and the authority.

In case, the authority would find any difficulty with the post-box number, they may insist upon personal details. However, in such case, it would be the solemn duty of the authority to hide such information and particularly from their website so that people at large would not know of the details.

We thus dispose of this writ petition by making the observations as above. The Secretary, Ministry of Personnel should circulate the copy of this order to all concerned so that the authority can take appropriate measure to hide information with regard to personal details of the activist to avoid any harassment by the persons having vested interest.

[Mr. Avishek Goenka: W.P. 33290(W) of 2013 dated on20.11.2013.]

levitra

Recovery of loan – Liability of guarantors – Is Co-extensive and Joint as well as Several: SFC Act 1951. Section 29 :

fiogf49gjkf0d
Usha Rani & Anr vs. Delhi Financial Corporation & Ors AIR 2013 Delhi 207

The respondent No. 1 Delhi Financial Corporation sanctioneda loan of Rs. 14,58,000/- to respondent No. 2 Shyam Lal for purchase of a CNG bus. A Term Loan  Agreement-cum-Hypothecation Deed was executedin favour of respondent No. 1. The petitioners had  stood as guarantors for the loan taken by respondentNo. 2 from respondent No. 1. Since respondent No.  2 defaulted in payment of the loan taken from respondentNo. 1, the bus which was purchased from the funds provided by respondent No. 1, was seized by respondent No. 1 and was sold for recovery of its dues. The respondent No. 1 filed an application u/s. 32(G) of State Financial Corporations Act “ SFC Act” for issuance of recovery certificate against the petitioners as well as the principal borrower for recovery of Rs. 17,20,507 and future interest in terms of Loan Agreement-cum-Hypothecation Deed executed by them in favour of respondent No. 1.

The respondent No. 1 had initiated proceedings for recovery of the balance amount payable to it, from the petitioners they being guarantors of the loan taken by respondent No. 2. Being aggrieved the petitioners approached the Court.
The Hon’ble Court observed that the petitioners do
not dispute that they had stood as guarantors for the
loan taken by respondent No. 2 from respondent No.
1. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent
No. 1 is not taking steps for recovering the balance
amount from respondent No. 2.

Since the petitioners had admittedly stood as guarantors for the loan taken by respondent No. 2, the liability of the guarantors being co-extensive and the liability of the principal borrower and the guarantors being joint as well as several, it is open to respondent No. 1 to recover its dues either from the petitioners or from respondent No. 2 or from all of them.

The legal position with respect to obligation of a guarantor to pay the amount guaranteed by him to the lender was upheld by the Apex Court in Industrial Investment Bank of India Ltd. vs. Biswanath Jhunjhunwala: JT 2009 (10) SC 533 where the apex court, after considering its earlier decision on the subject, inter alia, held as under:-

“30. The legal position as crystallised by a series of cases of this court is clear that the liability of the guarantor and principal debtors are co-extensive and not in alternative. When we examine the impugned judgment in the light of the consistent position of law, then the obvious conclusion has to be that the High Court under its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India was not justified to stay further proceedings in O.A. 156 of 1997.”

Since the liability of the petitioners is co-extensive and not in the alternative, no infirmity was committed by respondent No. 1 in seeking to recover the balance amount due to it, from the petitioners.

levitra

Evidence – Unregistered Partition Deed – Admissibility – Nature of Document: Evidence Act, Section 91:

fiogf49gjkf0d

Raj Gopal
Sharma vs. Krishna Gopal Sharma & Ors AIR 2013 Allahabad 187

The Hon’ble High Court held that u/s. 17(1)(b) of the Act, 1908, a document
recognising oral partition, if reduced to writing, need not to be registered
but if it is a document of partition, as such, it needs be registered,
otherwise by virtue of section 49 of Act, 1908, it would be inadmissible in
evidence. A partition of a property in a family precedes a settlement or
compromise between members of family as to how property commonly and jointly,
owned by them, should be settled among them.

The matter also came to be considered by a three Judge Bench in Kale and others
vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others, AIR 1976 SC 807, and the apex
court concretised certain propositions considering the effect and essentials of
“family settlement” in para 10 of the judgment, and held as under:

(1) The family settlement must be a bona fide one so as to resolve family
disputes and rival claims by a fair and equitable division or allotment of
properties between the various members of the family;

(2) The said settlement must be voluntary and should not be induced by fraud,
coercion or undue influence;

(3) The family arrangement may be even oral in which case no registration is
necessary;

(4) It is well-settled that registration would be necessary only if the terms
of the family arrangement are reduced to writing. Here also, a distinction
should be made between a document containing the terms and recitals of a family
arrangement made under the document and a mere memorandum prepared after the
family arrangement had already been made either for the purpose of the record
or for information of the Court for making necessary mutation. In such a case
the memorandum itself does not create or extinguish any rights in immovable properties
and therefore does not fall within the mischief of section 17(2) [section
17(1)(b)] of the Registration Act and is, therefore, not compulsorily
registrable;

(5) The members who may be parties to the family arrangement must have some
antecedent title, claim or interest or even a possible claim in the property
which is acknowledged by the parties to the settlement. Even if one of the
parties to the settlement has no title but under the arrangement the other
party relinquishes all its claims or titles in favour of such a person and
acknowledges him to be the sole owner, then the antecedent title must be
assumed and the family arrangement will be upheld, and the Courts will find no
difficulty in giving assent to the same;

(6) Even if bona fide disputes, present or possible, which may not involve
legal claims are settled by a bona fide family arrangement which is fair and
equitable the family arrangement is final and binding on the parties to the
settlement.

In the present case, the document in question has been signed by Sri Mangelal
Sharma karta and witnessed by Sri Swaroop Singh Tomar. It does not contain
signatures of all the members of the joint family. It thus cannot be said that
it was a mere “family settlement” between members of the family and signed by
all the members. If the aforesaid document sought to be enforced so as to
determine title of respective parties, i.e. plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 on
the property of late Mangelal Sharma, it would have to be given status of
‘partition deed’ and its registration was necessary.

The aforesaid document had rightly been held inadmissible in evidence on
account of not being registered. However, since defendant No. 2 has already
sold his share in respect of house No. 3, applying principle of estoppel, as
upheld by Apex Court in Kale (supra), he has been excluded from partition of
property in dispute.

 

Chartered Accountant – Disqualification – Offence of bigamy – Moral Turpitude – Removal proper: Natural justice – Chartered Accountants Act, 1949: Section 8(v) and 20(1)(d)

fiogf49gjkf0d
P. Mohanasundaram vs. The President, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, New Delhi & Anr.

AIR 2013 MADRAS 221

Appellant, a qualified Chartered Accountant, enrolled his name as Member of the Southern India Regional Council, Chennai. In the year 1984 matrimonial dispute arose between the appellant and his wife, which resulted in granting of divorce decree by the first Additional Family Court, Chennai on 13-11-2003, and the said divorce decree was confirmed by the High Court.

Before the said divorce decree was passed by the Family Court, the appellant’s estranged wife filed a complaint in the year 1990 before the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai, u/s. 494 IPC alleging bigamy. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai, tried the said complaint and convicted the appellant and imposed sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year by judgment dated 10-05-1999, which conviction was confirmed by the Supreme Court but the sentence was reduced.y reduction in sentence.

After a lapse of 4 years and 11 months, that was on 05-07-2009, the first respondent re-opened the said issue and sent a letter to the appellant stating that the conviction for bigamous marriage involves moral turpitude and therefore as per section 8 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, the appellant has to appear for an enquiry on 13-01-2009 at New Delhi to explain as to why his name should not be removed from the rolls/Register of Members. On 05-01-2009 the appellant sent a letter stating that by order dated 29-01-2004, the appellant was held ‘not guilty of any professional or other misconduct’ by considering the orders of the criminal court, including that of the Supreme Court dated 14-11-2003 and therefore no action need be initiated for the concluded matter. The first respondent, on 16-04-2010 passed an order removing the name of the appellant from the register of members.

The learned single Judge accepting the contentions raised by the respondents, upheld the order removing the name of the appellant from the Register of Chartered Accountants. The appeal is preferred against the said order.

The Hon’ble Court observed that it was not in dispute, after full trial, the appellant was convicted for the offence of bigamy and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The said conviction and sentence was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while confirming the conviction, reduced the sentence to that of sentence already suffered, as per the request made by the learned counsel for the appellant. Thus, it was beyond doubt that the conviction recorded in the criminal case against the appellant is subsisting as on today and the sentence imposed alone was reduced to the sentence already suffered.

The appellant’s contention that he was not heard before taking a decision to remove his name from the register was unsustainable as the appellant, in spite of giving opportunity to appear on 13-01-2009, not only failed to appear and he specifically took a decision not to appear. A person who refuses to appear in spite of receipt of notice for appearance, cannot be allowed to raise the plea of violation of principles of natural justice.

The next question considered was as to whether by virtue of the conviction for bigamous marriage the appellant sustained disability to retain his name in the register of Chartered Accountants.

One of the contentions of the appellant was that involvement of a person in an offence of bigamy is not coming within the purview of “moral turpitude”. The appellant and his estranged wife are Hindus, governed under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Section 17 of the Act states that marriage between two Hindus is void if two conditions are satisfied, viz., (1) the marriage is solemnised after the commencement of the said Act, and (2) at the date of such marriage, either party had a husband or wife living and the provisions of sections 494 and 495 shall apply accordingly. Thus, it was evident that if a Hindu marries with a person having a spouse living or he or she have a spouse living, marries any person, shall be liable for bigamy.

The Hon’ble Court held that the appellant married another woman, while the first marriage was subsisting, and had acted contrary to the law. Thus the offence of bigamy is coming within the meaning of “moral turpitude”. The conviction recorded against the appellant for bigamy stands even today though sentence was reduced to the period already undergone. Hence, the decision taken by the first respondent to remove the name of the appellant from the register maintained by the Chartered Accountants Council, which was upheld by the learned single Judge is valid and no interference was required.

levitra

Advocates – Representing arrested or detained person – cannot be criticised: Advocate has duty to represent such person: Constitution of India & Advocates Act 1961

fiogf49gjkf0d
K. Vijay Lakshimi (Smt) vs. Govt. of Andhra Pradesh & Ors AIR 2013 SC 3589

The Appellant was an advocate practicing in the courts at Markapur, District Prakasam in the state of Andhra Pradesh. The Andhra Pradesh High Court (Respondent No. 2 herein) had invited applications for the appointments to 105 posts of (Junior) Civil Judges. After the interviews, some 81 candidates from amongst the direct recruits were selected by a committee of Hon’ble Judges of the High Court, and this selection was approved by the Full Court on the administrative side. The Appellant was one of those who were selected,

However, it so transpired that whereas the other selected candidates were issued appointment letters, the Appellant was not. She, therefore, applied under the provisions of The Right to Information Act, 2005, to find out the reason of her non-appointment. She received a letter from the Respondent No. 1 which gave the following reason therefor:

I am directed to inform you that, adverse remarks were reported in the verification report, that your husband Sri. Srinivasa Chowdary, who is practicing as an Advocate in the Courts at Markapur is having close links with CPI (Maoist) Party which is a prohibited organisation.
of persons associated with this party, but she has never appeared in any such case. She further stated that her husband was a member of a panel of advocates who had defended political prisoners, against whom the district police had foisted false cases, and those cases had ended in acquittals. She disputed the bona-fides of the police department in making the adverse report, and relied upon the resolutions passed by various bar associations expressing that her husband was being made to suffer for opposing the police in matters of political arrests.

The Hon’ble Court observed that the decision taken by the State to not appoint a selected candidate for post of civil Judge in view of adverse police report without forwarding relevant papers to High Court for its consideration is contrary to Art 234 which specifically requires that these appointments are to be made after consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court exercising jurisdiction in the concerned State. The High Court may accept the adverse report or it may not. Ultimately, inasmuch as the selection is for the appointment to a judicial post, the Governor will have to be guided by the opinion of the High Court. In the instant case in view of the letter from the Home Department, the High Court has thrown up its hands and has not sought any more information from the State.

In view of the mandate of Article 234, the High Court has to take a decision on the suitability of a candidate on the administrative side, and it cannot simply go by the police reports, though such reports will, of course, form a relevant part of its consideration. To deny a public employment to a candidate solely on the basis of the police report regarding the political affinity of the candidate would be offending the Fundamental Rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, unless such affinities are considered likely to effect the integrity and efficiency of the candidate, or unless  there is clear material indicating the involvement of the candidate in the subversive or violent activities of a banned organisation.

The appellant selected candidate could not be turned back at the very threshold, on the ground of her alleged political activities.

She, therefore, filed a writ petition in the High Court of Judicature. The Division Bench dismissed the writ petition. Being aggrieved by this decision, the Appellant filed an appeal to the apex court.

The Appellant stated that she was not a member of CPI (Maoist), nor did she have any connection with the banned organisation or with any of its leaders. She disputed that any such organisation, by name CMS existed, and in any case, she was not a member of any such organisation. She submitted that her husband must have appeared in some bail applications
The court further observed that all such accused do have the right to be defended lawfully until they are proved guilty, and the advocates have the corresponding duty to represent them, in accordance with law.

We cannot ignore that during the freedom struggle, and even after independence, many leading lawyers have put in significant legal service for the political and civil right activists, arrested or detained.

levitra

Shareholders’ Agreements

fiogf49gjkf0d
Synopsis

Shareholders’ Agreements are one of the definitive documents in case of an investment in a company. They are full of jargon which is often unintelligible to laymen and promoters signing without understanding them. This Article explains restrictive covenants, put options and veto rights found in Shareholders’ Agreements. It also analyses their validity under the Companies Act, 1956, the 2013 Act and the position for Listed Companies. Lastly, the Article examines the remedies for enforceability of such Agreements.

Introduction

Shareholders’ Agreements are one of the definitive documents which we witness in cases of an investment in a company by a Private Equity Fund, Foreign Direct Investor, etc. A Shareholders’ Agreement contains various restrictive covenants by theexisting promoters of the investee company, which usually are in the form of representations and warranties  as well as promises to do or abstain fromdoing certain acts. These promises are important for the investor to invest in the investee company  since they represent an assurance to him about hisexit route and other rights. One unique feature of Shareholders’ Agreements is that they are full of jargon which is often unintelligible to laymen.

Promoters, usually in a hurry to secure funds, end up signing on the dotted line of the Agreement without fully understanding the true repercussions of the Agreement. It is only later when these clauses materialise into reality that they wake up and smell the coffee but by then it is too late. Through this Article, let us understand better some of the important covenants which one come across in a Shareholders’ Agreement.

Restrictive Covenants

One or more restrictive covenants, such as, First Refusal, Tag Along, Drag Along, Russian Roulette, Texas Shoot-out, Dutch auction rights, etc., are usually found in Shareholders’ Agreement. These are briefly explained below:

(a) Right of First Refusal
This is the most common and easily understood covenant since it is found in the Articles of Association of all Private Companies. In case the Promoters desire to transfer any or all of their shares, the investor will have a Right of First Refusal, popularly called a RoFR, to purchase these shares. The pricing of the RoFR and the terms and conditions of the sale are the same as those that the promoter is offering to the prospective purchaser. In some cases, the promoter may also have a RoFR on the investor’s shares.

(b) Tag Along Rights

Tag along rights mean that if the promoters wish to sell their shares to anyone else, then the investor can tag along with them and offer its own shares. Example, a buyer has agreed to buy 50,000 shares from the promoter @ Rs. 100 per share. If the investor tags along with the promoter then either the buyer buys 50,000 from him also @ Rs. 100 or he buys 25,000 each  from the promoter and the investor. Thus, the investor gets an exit if the promoter gets one. These are also known as piggy back rights since the investor piggy backs on the promoter.

(c) Drag Along Rights

On the other hand, drag along rights mean that if the investor wishes to sell his shares to a third party and if that third party also requires that the promoters should sell their shares, then the investor can drag along the promoters. Example, a buyer has agreed to buy 50,000 shares from the investor @ Rs. 100 per share. If the buyer wishes to buy more share as a pre-condition, then the investor can drag along with him the promoter and in that case the promoter must also sell the same number of shares at the same terms as the investor. Thus, if the buyer wants to buy out the whole company and not just the investor’s stake, then the drag along clause would enable an investor to facilitate such a transaction.

(d) Russian Roulette

Not very popular in India, a Russian Roulette clause means that “you buy me out or I buy you out”. The investor specifies a price at which either the promoter sells to him or buys the investor out. This is often resorted to when there is a deadlock situation.

(e) Texas Shoot Out

A third party is appointed as a Referee. Both the investor and the promoter submit bids to the Referee. Whichever is the higher bid wins and the winner must buy out the loser at that price. This is an extreme deadlock resolution mechanism.

(f) Dutch auction

A modification of the Texas Shoot out, in a Dutch auction also bids are submitted to a Referee. Only in this case the bids are for the minimum selling price. The winner must buy out the loser at the price quoted by the loser.

(g) Pre-emptive Rights

The investor has pre-emptive rights to participate in any future issuance (other than the current round) of equity (and other instruments convertible into equity) by the company on terms and at a price determined by the company but not less favourable than those offered by the company to any other investor, to retain its fully diluted equity shareholding in the company. The investor has a 20% stake in a company which has a capital of 1 crore shares. The company decides to increase its share capital by a further issue of 20 lakh shares. The investor must be offered 4 lakh shares out of this further issue so that it can maintain its holding of 20% in the post-issue capital of the company.

(h) Put Option

The investor has a right /option but not an obligation to sell its shares to the promoter of the investee company in case the company does not give it an exit in the form of an IPO /an Offer for Sale/Buyback of the investor’s shares. Thus, the promoters are bound to buy out the investor at a predetermined  price or a pricing formula whichis specified upfront. This ensures an exit for the investor if all other methods fail.

The Supreme Court has recognised such rights in its decision in celebrated decision of Vodafone International Holdings, 341 ITR 1 (SC) and held as under:

“SHA, therefore, regulate the ownership and voting rights of shares in the company including ROFR, TARs, DARs, Preemption Rights, Call Options, Put Options, Subscription Option etc. in relation to any shares issued by the company, restriction of transfer of shares or granting securities interest over shares, provision for minority protection, lock-down or for the interest of the shareholders and the company. Provisions referred to above, which find place in a SHA, may regulate the rights between the parties which are purely contractual and those rights will have efficacy only in the course of ownership of shares by the parties.”

Validity of Restrictive Covenants under Companies Act, 1956

The Supreme Court has held that they are valid against a company only if they are a part of the Articles of Association or else they remain a private contract between shareholders – V.B. Rangarajan vs.  V. Gopalkrishnan, 73 Comp. Cases 201 (SC). While thishas been the cornerstone for the law on Shareholders’ Agreements, the Supreme Court in Vodafone (supra) has taken a contrary view. The Concurring Order of J. Radhakrishnan, states in relation to Rangarajan’s judgment as follows:

“This Court has taken the view that provisions of the Shareholders’ Agreement imposing restrictions even when consistent with Company legislation, are to be authorized only when they are incorporated in the Articles of Association, a view we do not subscribe.

Rangarajan’s decision was delivered by a Two-Member Supreme Court Bench, while Vodafone’s decision has been delivered by a Three-Member Bench, although the disagreement is expressed by the Concurring Judgment of one of its Members. It may be noted that the Vodafone decision has not expressly overruled Rangarajan’s decision.

Vodafone’s decision has further laid down that shareholders can enter into any Agreement in the best interest of the company, but the only thing is that the provisions shall not go contrary to the Articles of Association. The essential purpose of the Agreement is to make provisions for proper and effective internal management of the company. It can visualise the best interest of the company on diverse issues and can also find different ways not only for the best interest of the shareholders, but also for the company as a whole.

In the case of M.S. Madhusoodhanan vs. Kerala Kaumudi Pvt. Ltd., 117 Comp Cases 19 (SC) it was held that consensual agreements between shareholders relating to their shares do not impose restriction on transferability of shares and they can be enforced like any other agreement. Even if the company is a party to the Shareholders’ Agreement, the provisions relating to management of the affairs of a company cannot be given effect to unless the same are incorporated in its Articles of Association – IL &

FS Trust Co. Ltd vs. Birla Perucchini Ltd., 47 SCL 426 (Bom). Again, in Rolta India Ltd vs. Venire Industries Ltd., 100 Comp. Cases 19 (Bom), it was held that the shareholders cannot infringe upon the fiduciary rights and duties of directors. Any agreement by which the shareholders agreed not to increase the number of directors above a certain limit was not valid as long as the restriction was enshrined in the Articles of Association. The shareholders cannot dictate terms to directors except by amending the Articles. In Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2010] 7 SCC 1, it was held that a Family Arrangement MOU executed by the key personnel of a listed company was held not to be binding on the company since the contents of the MOU were not made public. It was held that the MOU did not fall under the corporate domain – it was not approved by the shareholders. Therefore, technically, the MOU was not legally binding.

A Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, in the case of Western Maharashtra Development Corporation vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd., 154 Comp Cases 593 (Bom), had ruled that a Shareholders’ Agreement of a public company containing restrictive covenants was invalid since the Articles of a public company could not contain covenants restricting the trans-fer of shares and it was contrary to Section.108 of the Companies Act, 1956. Subsequently, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, in the case of Messer Holdings Ltd vs. Shyam Ruia, 159 Comp Cases 29 (Bom) has overruled this decision of the Single Judge of the Bombay High Court. The Bombay Court here was concerned with the validity of a Right of First Refusal Clause. The Court held that the intent of section 111A of the Companies Act, 1956 dealing with free transferability of shares does not in any manner hamper the right of its shareholders to enter into private treaties so long as it is in accordance with the Companies Act, 1956 and the company’s Articles of Association. Had the Companies Act, 1956 wanted to prevent such private contracts it would have expressly done so.

Interestingly, a recent decision of the Delhi Court in the case of World Phone India vs. WPI Group Inc, 119 SCL 196 (Del) has held that even a provision in the Shareholders’ Agreement which is not contrary to the Articles of Association or the Companies Act, 1956 cannot be enforced against the company if the company is not a party to such an Agreement. While it was settled law that in case of a conflict the Articles would prevail but this decision lays down that even if the Articles are silent on an issue and not in conflict, the provisions of the Shareholders’ Agreement cannot be enforced against the company.

Thus, the issue of Articles vs. Shareholders’ Agreement has yet not reached a finality.

Position under Companies Act, 2013

The Companies Act, 2013 now provides that securities in a public company are freely transferrable but a contract or an arrangement in respect of transfer of securities in a public company shall be enforceable as a contract. This express provision sets at rest once and for all whether public companies can contain pre-emptive rights. This is a big boost for Private Equity/FDI/Private Investment in Public Equity (PIPE) transactions since they almost always come with pre-emptive rights.

Position in the case of Listed Companies

It may be specifically noted that the Bombay High Court judgment in Messer Holdings (supra) was in the case of a listed company. Recently, the SEBI, taking a cue from the Companies Act, 2013, has issued a Notification under the Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956, expressly permitting “contracts for pre-emption including right of first refusal, or tag-along or drag along rights contained in shareholders agreements or articles of association of companies”. Thus, these restrictive covenants can now expressly find their way even in Shareholders’ Agreements of Listed Companies, without the prior approval of the SEBI. It may be noted that even today the Articles of Association of several Listed Companies contain such pre-emptive rights.

The Notification further provides that even agreements for put and call options on listed securities are permitted subject to the following conditions:

(i)    the title and ownership of the underlying securities is held continuously by the seller for a minimum period of 1 year from the date of entering into the contract;

(ii)    the price or consideration payable for the sale or purchase of the underlying securities pursuant to exercise of any option contained therein, is in compliance with all the laws for the time being in force as applicable;

(iii)    the contract is settled by way of actual delivery of the underlying securities; and

(iv)    the contract shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 and Rules or Regulations made thereunder.

SEBI had in the cases of Cairn India Ltd., Vedanta Resources Plc. and Vulcan Rubber Ltd., held that an option arrangement in the case of shares of a listed company is not valid. This change in position is a welcome move.

Veto Rights/Affirmative Vote

Almost all investors want Veto Rights, i.e., certain specific fundamental issues, on which the company would not take a decision without the affirmative vote of the Investor. Thus, the Investor acquires a veto right on these issues. Some of the issues which may carry a veto include, alteration of the rights and privileges of the investor’s shares; change in the capital structure of the company; related party transactions with promoters in excess of certain limits; corporate reorganisation of the company; borrowing in excess of certain limits; change in the scope of the business; capital expenditure in excess of certain limit; commencement of any major litigation by the company; changes in key management personnel, etc.

By virtue of a veto, the investor has power to stall a decision of the company. However, in most cases, he does not have power to carry out a decision on his own behest. Thus, if he refuses the company cannot go ahead but if he proposes and the com-pany refuses then he cannot proceed on his own. A question often asked is that does the grant of such special rights make the investor a person in control of the company? This is a question of fact.

In the case of Subhkam Ventures (I) (P.) Ltd. vs. SEBI, 99 SCL 159 (SAT), the SAT held that the question to be asked in each case is whether the acquirer is the driving force behind the company and whether he is the one providing motion to the organization. If yes, he is in control but not otherwise. In short, control means effective control. In this case, the SAT held that the investor who had veto rights did not control the company. The SEBI contested it before the Supreme Court, where an interesting mutual consent agreement was arrived upon. The Supreme Court’s Order in SEBI vs. Subhkam Ventures, Civil Appeal No. 3371 /2010 states that certain facts changed after the SAT Order. Accordingly, the Court, by mutual consent, disposed of the appeal filed by SEBI by keeping the question of law open and it is also clarified that the order passed by the SAT will not be treated as a precedent. This leaves the all-important question yet open for interpretation. Some of the recent high-profile foreign takeovers/joint ventures have reportedly run into a roadblock with the SEBI on similar grounds. SEBI has questioned whether the grant of special investor protection rights to the foreign investor results into a sharing of management control with the Indian promoters?

Enforceability of Shareholders’ Agreement

A breach of a Shareholders’ Agreement would give rise to a suit for specific performance by the aggrieved party under the Specific Relief Act. However, in several cases, the Agreement itself provides that Arbitration would be the sole dispute resolution mechanism. It may further provide for Indian or Foreign Arbitration, e.g., in Singapore, London, Paris, etc.

In the case of Vodafone (supra), the Supreme Court held that the manner in which Shareholders’ Agreements are to be enforced in the case of breach is given in the general law between the company and the shareholders. A breach of such an Agreement which does not breach the Articles of Association is a valid corporate action but the aggrieved can get remedies under the general law of the land for breach of the Agreement and not under the Companies Act.

In the case of Chatterjee Petrochem (I) P Ltd vs. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., 110 SCL 107 (SC), an interesting issue arose. Certain disputes arose be-tween two sets of shareholders who were party to a Shareholders Agreement. The aggrieved party moved a petition for oppression u/s. 397 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Supreme Court held that in that case the breach of the Shareholders’ Agreement was a breach between two members of the company and not by the company itself. Hence, no occasion arises for filing a plea for oppression u/s. 397.

Conclusion

Shareholder Agreements have always attracted a lot of controversy and the spate of conflicting judgments have fueled the fire further. Parties to a Shareholders’ Agreement would be well advised to understand the implications of what they are getting into before signing such Agreements. Do Not Act in Haste and Repent in Leisure!!

Provisions For Management, Administration and Dividend Declaration Under the Companies Act, 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
The Companies Act, 2013 has been passed by the Parliament. It has received the assent of the President on 29th August, 2013. After the Act is notified it will replace the existing Companies Act, 1956. By a notification dated 12-09-2013, 98 out of 470 sections of the Act have been brought into force from 12.9.2013. The provisions relating to Management and Administration of companies and other relevant provisions are contained in the following sections of the New Act. Draft Rules relating these provisions have been issued by the Government for
Public Comments.

(i) Chapter VII – Section 88 to 122 – Management and Administration.
(ii) Chapter VIII – Section 123 to 127 – Declaration of Dividend
(iii) Chapter VI – Section 77 to 87 – Registration of charges.

Most of these provisions are similar to the provisions in the existing Act. Some of the important provisions which require attention during the course of management, administration and Declaration of Dividends by Companies are discussed in this Article.

1 Register of Members:

1.1  The provisions relating to maintenance of Register of Members. Debenture holders and any other securities in the company in section 88 of the New Act are similar to the provisions in sections 150 to 152 and 152A of the existing Act. Draft Rules 7.1 to 7.6 provide for the procedure and also prescribes Form in which the Register is to be maintained.

1.2  Sections 89 and 90 of the New Act which correspond to existing section 187C and 187D provide for declaration to be made by a person who does not hold beneficial interest in the shares registered in the company in his name. Similarly, the beneficial owner has also to make this declaration. This declaration is to be made in the prescribed form and submitted to the company within the prescribed time limit. Particulars of changes in beneficial interest are also to be filed with the company within 30 days of change. The company has to register particulars of such beneficial interest and file a return in the prescribed form with the ROC within 30 days of receipt of such declaration. Draft Rule 7.7 prescribes Forms for this purpose and also provides for procedure for this purpose.

1.3  The Central Government is given power to investigate about the beneficial ownership of shares in the company by appointing one or more competent persons under new section 90.

1.4  The above Register of members, debentureholders etc. can be closed for an aggregate period of 45 days in each year, but not exceeding 35 days at a time, u/s. 91 which corresponds to existing section 154. If the above Register is closed for more than the above period, the company and every defaulting officer will be liable to pay penalty of Rs. 5,000/- per day of default subject to maximum of Rs.1 lakh. It may be noted that Section 91 has come into force from 12-09-2013. Draft Rule 7.8 provides for procedure for this purpose.

1.5  If the company fails to maintain the register u/s. 88, the company and every defaulting officer shall be punishable with minimum fine of Rs. 50,000/- which may extend to Rs. 3 lakh. In the case of continuing default fine upto Rs. 10,00/- per day can also be charged.

1.6  If a person required to make declaration of beneficial interest u/s. 89, without reasonable cause, fails to make the declaration, he will be punished with fine upto Rs. 50,000/- . In case of continuing default fine upto Rs. 1,000/- per day can also be charged. Similarly, if the company makes default in filing return giving particulars of these declarations with ROC as required u/s. 89(6), it shall be liable to pay minimum fine of Rs. 500/- which may extend to Rs. 1,000/-. In the case of continuing default, further fine upto Rs. 1,000/- per day for the period of delay can be levied.

2. Annual return:

2.1 New Section 92 which corresponds to existing sections 159, 161 and 162 provides for filing the Annual Return with ROC within 60 days of holding Annual General Meeting. If such AGM is not held the Annual Return should be filed with ROC within 60 days of the last date when AGM was due to be held. In such a case the company will have to file a statement specifying reasons for not holding the AGM in time.

2.2 Broadly stated the Annual Return is to be prepared in the prescribed form containing the following particulars as on the last day of the financial year.

(i) Its Registered Office, principal place of business, particulars of its holding, subsidiary and associate companies.

(ii) Its shares, debentures and other securities and shareholding pattern.

(iii) Its indebtedness.

(iv) Its members and debenture-holders along with changes therein since the close of previous financial year

(v) Its promoters, directors, key managerial personnel (KMP) along with the charges therein since the close of the previous financial year.

(vi) Meetings of Members or a class thereof, Board and its various committees with attendance details.

(vii) Remuneration of Directors and KMP.

(viii) Penalty and punishment imposed on the company, its directors or officers with details of compounding of offenses and appeals made against such penalty or punishment.

(ix) Matters relating to certification of compliances, disclosures as may be prescribed.

(x) Details in respect of Shares held by FIIs giving their names, addresses etc. and percentage of shareholding as may be prescribed.

(xi) Such other matters as may be prescribed.

The annual return is to be signed by a Director and company secretary/company secretary in practice. In the case of one person company and small company, it is to be signed by the company secretary or, if there no secretary, by the director.

In the case of a listed company or such specified companies, as may be prescribed, the Annual Return is required to be certified by a company secretary in practice in the prescribed form.

2.3 An extract of the Annual Return in the prescribed form should form part of the Board Report.

Draft Rules 7.9, 7.10, and 7.12 provide for Forms of Annual Return etc and procedure to be followed for filing the Annual Return with ROC.

2.4  If the company does not file the Annual Return within 60 days as stated above or within the extended time as provided in section 403 with additional fees, the company shall be punishable with the minimum fine of Rs. 50,000/- which may extend to Rs. 5 lakh. Similarly, every defaulting officer will be punishable with imprisonment upto 6 months or with a minimum fine of Rs. 50,000/- which may extend to Rs. 5 lakh or with both. Similar fine can be levied on the company secretary in practice if his certificate is not in conformity with the requirements of the section.

2.5  Section 93 is a new section which provides that every listed company should file a return in the prescribed form with ROC with respect to changes in the number of shares held by promotors and top 10 shareholders within 15 days of such charge. Draft Rule 7.11 prescribes Form No.7.10 for this purpose.

2.6  New sections 94 and 95 which correspond to existing sections 163 and 164 provide for place at which Registers, Returns and other documents required to be maintained by the company shall be kept. These registers, documents etc.will be open for inspection by shareholders, debenture holders etc. Draft Rules 7.13 and 7.14 provide for detailed procedure for this purpose. It is provided that the copies of Annual Returns should be preserved for 8 years and Register of Debenture Holders, Foreign register of Members etc. should be preserved for 15 years.

3. Procedure for General Meetings:

3.1 New sections 96 to 122 deal with procedure to be followed for holding Annual General Meeting, Extra ordinary general meeting and other related matters. These sections are similar to the existing sections 166 to 197. The provisions made in the new sections being similar to existing provisions, some of the important provisions are stated in the following paragraphs.

3.2    Annual General Meeting (Section 96)

(i)    One person company is not required to hold AGM.

(ii)    All other companies have to hold AGM once every year within the same time limit as provided in existing sections 166 and 210. The only difference is that the first AGM which at present can be held within 18 months of date of incorporation will now required to be held within 9 months of the closing of the first financial year.

(iii)    Under existing section 166 AGM can not be held on a ‘Public Holiday’. Now u/s. 96 AGM can be held on a “Public Holiday”. However, it cannot be held on a “National Holiday” as may be declared by the Central Government.

Further, under the new provision it is specifically provided that AGM can be held during business hours i.e. between 9.00 AM and 6.00 PM. The Central Government can grant exemption from this requirement, subject to such conditions which it may impose.

(iv)    If there is a default in holding ay AGM, the Tribunal can, on an application by any member, direct the company to hold such a meeting subject to such conditions as the Tribunal may specify under new section 97.

(v)    Similarly, the Tribunal, on its own or on an application by a Director or member, direct the company to hold any general meeting (other than AGM) subject to such conditions which it may specify under new section 98.

(vi)    If there is default in holding any general meeting, in accordance with the above direction of the Tribunal the company and every defaulting officer of the company will be punishable with fine upto Rs1 lac. In case of continuing default a further fine upto Rs.5000/- per day during which default continues can be levied under new section 99.

3.3    Extraordinary General Meetings:

The procedure for calling an Extraordinary General Meeting in new section 100 is the same as in the existing section 169. This procedure is laid down in Draft Rule 7.15. This section has come into force from 12-09-2013.

3.4    Notices for General Meetings:

(i)    New section 101 provides for notice to be given in writing or through electronic mode 21 clear days before the meeting in the same manner as provided in existing sections 171 and 172. However, a general meeting can be called by giving shorter notice if consent is given by at least 95% of members entitled to vote at such meeting.

(ii)    Explanatory statement is to be annexed with every notice concerning each item of special business to be transacted at the General Meeting. New section 102 which corresponds to existing section 173 provides for this requirement. It explains the material facts in respect of which the explanation as under is to be provided:

(a)    Nature of concern or interest, financial or otherwise in respect of each items of every director, manager, KMP, and their relatives.

(b)    Any other information and facts that may enable members to understand the meaning, scope and implications of the items of business and to take decision thereon.

(iii)    It is further provided in section 102 that if any item of specified business relates or affects any other company, the notice must disclose the extent of interest of every promoter, director, Manager or KMP of the company, if it is more than 2% of the paid up share capital of that company. This section has come into force on 12-09-2013.

(iv)    Where, as a result of the non-disclosure or insufficient disclosure in the statement to be furnished as above by the promoter, director, manager or KMP, any benefit accrues to any of these persons, he shall hold the same in trust for the company and compensate the company to the extent of the benefit received by him.

(v)    In the event of any contravention of this section, the defaulting promoter, director, manager, KMP or relatives of any of them shall be punishable with fine upto Rs.50000/-or 5 times the amount of the benefit received by such person, whichever is more.

(vi)    The procedure for giving Notice of the General Meeting is given in Draft Rule 7.16.

3.5    Quorum for the General Meeting:

Under the existing section 174 quorum required for the General Meeting of members of public companies is 5 members personally present at the meeting, unless the articles stipulate a larger number. New section 103 provides for a quorum based on number of members of the company as under, unless the articles provide for larger numbers.

(i)    5 Members personally present if the number of members on the date of meeting is less than 1,000.

(ii)    15 Members, if the number of members is between 1,000 and 5,000.

(iii)    30 Members, if the number of Members are more than 5,000.

For private companies, the quorum of 2 members continue, as at present. Section 103 has come into force on 12-09-2013.

3.6    Procedure for conducting General Meeting:

(i)    New sections 104 to 116, deal with the procedure for election of chairman, proxies, voting at general meeting etc. These provisions are similar to existing provision in sections 175 to 185 and 187 to 192A. Only section 108 is new. It provides that the Central Government may prescribe class of companies in which members will be allowed to exercise their voting rights by electronic means. It may be noted that Sections 104 to 107, 111 to 114 and 116 have come into force from 12-09-2013.

(ii)    At present, section 190 does not provide for any requirement that members who give special notice should hold some minimum voting power in the company. New section 115, now provides that such special notice for consideration of a resolution as required under the Act or Articles can be given by such number of members holding not less than one percentage of total voting power or holding shares on which such aggregate sum not exceeding Rs. 5 lakh, as may be prescribed, has been paid up. (Refer Draft Rule 7.21).

(iii)    It may be noted that new section 110 provides for passing resolutions by “Postal Ballot”. This provision is similar to existing section 192A. The company can use this procedure in respect of such items of business as the Central Government may by notification provide. (Refer Draft Rule 7.20 (16).

(iv)    Form of Proxy to be given u/s. 105 (Form No.7.11) is prescribed under Draft Rule 7.17. Procedure for voting through electronic means is given in Draft Rule 7.18. Similarly procedure for Poll process is provided in Draft Rule 7.18 and procedure for Postal Ballot is provided in Draft Rule 7.20.

3.7    Resolutions and Agreements to be filed with ROC:

New section 117, which corresponds to existing section 192, provides for filing of Resolutions and Agreements specified in section 117(3) with ROC within 30 days. In the event of contravention of the provision of this section the company shall be punishable with minimum fine of Rs. 5 lakh which may extend to Rs. 25 lakh. Similarly, every defaulting officer shall be punishable with minimum fine of Rs. 1 lakh which may extend to Rs. 5 lakh. Form No. 7.14 is prescribed by Draft Rule 7.22.

3.8    Minutes of Meetings:

(i)    New section 118 corresponds to existing sections 193 to 195 and 197. It provides for maintenance of minutes of proceedings of General Meetings, Board meetings and other meetings. It is specifically provided in this new section that while recording these minutes, the company shall observe the “Secretarial Standards” in this respect, issued ICSI as approved by the Central Government.

(ii)    In the event of non-compliance with the requirement of this section, the company will be liable to penalty of Rs. 25,000/- and every defaulting officer shall be liable to pay penalty of Rs. 5,000/-. If any person is found guilty of tempering with the minutes, he shall be punishable with imprisonment upto 2 years and with minimum fine of Rs. 25,000/- which may extend to Rs. 1 lakh.

(iii)    New section 119 which corresponds existing to section 196 provides for inspection of the minute books of general meetings of the company. If such inspection is refused, monetary penalty similar to the one stated in (ii) above can be levied on the company and the defaulting officer.

(iv)    Detailed procedure for this purpose is provided in Draft Rules 7.23 and 7.24.

3.9    Some New Provisions:

Sections 120 to 122 are new. They provide as under.

(i)    Maintenance and Inspection of Document in Electronic Form Section 120 provides that any document, record, register, minutes etc. which are required to be kept by a company and allowed to be inspected or copied by any person can be kept, inspected or copies given in electronic form in the prescribed manner. This is prescribed in Draft Rule 7.25.

(ii)    Report on AGM

Under Section 121 a listed company is required to prepare in the prescribed manner a report on each AGM stating that such meeting was convened, held and conducted as required under the companies Act. This report is to be filed with ROC within 30 days of conclusion of AGM. Draft Rule 7.26 gives the contents of this Report. In the event of contravention of this provision, the company will be punishable with minimum fine of Rs. 1 lakh which may extend to Rs. 5 lakh. Similarly, every defaulting officer will be punishable with minimum fine of Rs. 25,000/- which may extend to Rs. 1 lakh.

(iii)    One person company

Section 122 provides that sections 98 and 100 to 111 shall not apply to one person company (OPC) . If a company is required to transact any business by ordinary or special resolution u/s. 114, it shall be sufficient in the case of OPC if the said resolution is recorded in the minute book which shall be signed by the Director.

4.  Registration of Charges:

4.1 New Sections 77 to 87 deal with the procedure relating to Registration of charges. These provisions are similar to provisions of sections 125 to 127, 130, 134, 135, 137, 138 and 141 to 143 of the existing Act. For this purpose, section 2(16) defines the word ‘charge’ to mean “An interest or lien created on the property or assets of a company or any of its undertakings or both as Security and includes a Mortgage. Section 2(16) has come into force from 12- 09-2013. Broadly stated, the new provisions are as under.

(i)    U/s. 77 every charge on the property or as-sets (whether tangible or intangible) created by a company (whether public or private) shall be registered with ROC within 30 days of creation of such charge. For this purpose, the prescribed form will have to be filed with the fees. In the event of any delay, ROC can permit the registration of such charge within 300 days on payment of additional fees.

(ii)    The existing section 125(4) requires a company to register only 9 type of charges. Under the new provision every charge created by it on property, assets or undertaking is to be registered u/s. 77.

(ii)    ROC has to give a Certificate of such registration in the prescribed form.

(iv)    If the company fails to register a charge, the person in whose favour charge is created can apply to ROC in the prescribed manner, as provided in section 78.

(v)    ROC has to keep a Register of charges in the prescribed form. This Register will be open to inspection to any person on payment of fees.

(vi)    Any modification of charge is also required to be registered with ROC.

(vii)    On satisfaction of any charge, it is also to be registered with ROC within 30 days. In the event of delay, ROC can permit such registration within 300 days on payment of additional fees.

(viii)    The company has also to maintain a Register of charges in the prescribed manner. This register shall be open to inspection by any member or creditor or by any other person subject to such reasonable restrictions as the company may by its AOA, impose.

(ix)    If the company does not register such creation, modification or satisfaction of charge the company or any other person can apply to the Central Government u/s. 87. The Government can order such registration of charge or its modification, satisfaction etc. on such terms and conditions as it may consider appropriate.

(x)    Draft Rules 6.1 to 6.10 prescribes Forms to be filed with ROC and other procedure to be followed and documents to be maintained for this purpose.

4.2    A new provision is made in section 83. It authorizes the ROC to make entries in the Register of charges if any evidence is produced before him about creation of a charge or modification/satisfaction of charge on any property/assets by a company. ROC has to intimate the concerned parties about making such entry within 30 days.

4.3 If there is any contravention of the provisions, section 86 provides for the following penalties.

(i)    The company shall be punishable with a minimum fine of Rs. 1 lakh which may extend to Rs. 10 lakh.

(ii)    Every defaulting officer shall be punishable with imprisonment upto 6 months or with minimum fine of Rs. 25,000/- which may extend to Rs. 1 lakh or with both.

The above penalty can be levied even if the company has complied with the above provisions but filed the particulars of charges, modification or satisfaction etc. of the charges within the extended time as stated above. This section has come into force on 12-09-2013.

5.    Declaration and Payment of Dividend:


Declaration of Dividend:

5.1 New Sections 123 to 127 provide for declaration and payment of Dividends by a Company. These Sections are similar to existing sections 205 to 207. Broadly stated these provisions are as under:-

(i)    The dividend can be declared and paid only out of the following profits;

(a)    Profits of the financial year, after providing depreciation as stated in Section 123(2) read with Schedule II.

(b)    Accumulated profits of the earlier years, after providing for depreciation u/s 123(2) read with Schedule II.

(c)    Out of money provided by Central or State Government for payment of dividend in pursuance of a guarantee given by the Government.

(ii)    Existing section 205(2A) provides that a dividend can be declared for any financial year only after transferring such percentage of profit not exceeding 10%, as may be prescribed. In the new section 123, it is provided that such dividend may be declared or paid after transferring such percentage of its profits for the financial year to reserves as the Company may consider appropriate. Thus a Company can declare or pay dividend in any year even without making such transfer to reserves.

(iii)    In the event of inadequacy or absence of profits in any financial year, the company can declare dividend out of its “Free Reserves” in accordance with the prescribed Rules.(Refer Draft Rule 8.1)

(iv)    Board of Directors can declare “Interim Dividend” out of surplus available in the Profit & Loss Account and out of profits of the Financial Year upto the date of declaration of such dividend. If the Company has made a loss upto the end of the quarter, preceding the date of declaration of interim dividend, the Board cannot declare interim dividend at a rate higher than the average dividend declared by the Company during the preceding 3 Financial Years.

(v)    The amount of dividend, including interim dividend, has to be deposited in a Separate Scheduled Bank Account within 5 days from the date of declaration.

(vi)    It will be possible for the Company to utilise the profits and reserves for issue of Bonus
Shares or for payment of Unpaid amount on partly paid shares.

(vii)    It may be noted that a Company cannot declare or pay dividend if it has made de-fault in repayment of Deposits or Interest as provided in sections 73 and 74 till such time when the default continues.

(viii)    Draft Rules 8.1 and 8.2 provides for certain conditions to be complied with before declaring dividend.


5.2  Unclaimed Dividend Account:

(i)    If any dividend is not claimed or paid within 30 days from the date of declaration, it has to be transferred, within 7 days, to a “Unpaid Dividend Account” to be opened in a Scheduled Bank.

(ii)    If any amount of unpaid dividend is not claimed or paid within 90 days, the company has to put the list of such unpaid dividend on the website of the company or other approved website in the prescribed manner. Draft Rule 8.3 provides for procedure for this purpose.

(iii)    In the event of delay in transferring the amount to such special account, the company will have to pay 12% P.A. interest on the unclaimed dividend amount.

(iv)    If the unclaimed dividend is not claimed by any shareholder for 7 years, the company will have to transfer the said amount to “Investor Education and Protection Fund” as provided in section 125. Procedure for this is provided in Draft Rule 8.4.

(v)    Section 124(6) makes a departure from the existing provisions of section 205C and provides that even the shares on which dividend is not claimed for 7 years will have to be transferred to the above Fund. For this purpose, a statement in the prescribed form is to be filed with the Administrator of the Fund. The shareholder whose shares are so transferred to the above Fund will have to make a claim for return of such shares with the Administrator of the Fund in the prescribed manner. Draft Rule 8.5 gives detailed procedure for this purpose.

5.3    Investor Education and Protection Fund:

New Section 125, corresponding to existing section 205C provides for establishment of Investor Education and Protection Fund. Central Government is authorised to establish this Fund and prescribe Rules for its administration as provided in section 125. Besides the unclaimed Dividend outstanding for 7 years and shares relating to such dividend, the company has also to transfer the following amounts which have remained unclaimed for 7 years.

(a)    Application Money received by the Company for allotment of shares or securities and due for refund.

(b)    Matured Deposits due with Interest.

(c)    Matured Debentures due with interest.

(d)    Sale proceeds of Fractional Shares arising out of issue of Bonus Shares, Merger and Amalgamation.

(e)    Redemption amount of Preference Shares remaining unpaid or unclaimed.

Detailed provisions are made in section 125 for administration of “Investment Education and Protection Fund”, investment of funds, return of the funds to claimants and utilisation of surplus funds. Central Government has to prescribe Rules for this purpose. It is also provided that the existing balance in Investor Education and Protection fund created u/s. 205C of the existing Act shall also be transferred to the new fund to be established under new section 125. Further, amounts transferred to the existing fund u/s. 205C (2) (a) to (d) of the existing Act can be refunded to the concerned person according to the Rules to be prescribed under new section 125. Detailed provision is given in Draft Rules 8.6 and 8.7.

5.4    Penalties for Defaults:

(i)    If a Company contravenes provisions relating to unclaimed Dividends as stated in section 124, it will be punishable with a minimum fine of Rs. 5 lakh which may extend to Rs. 25 lakh. Similarly every defaulting officer will be punishable with a minimum fine of Rs. 1 lakh which may extend to Rs. 5 lakh.

(ii)    If a Company has declared dividend but the same has not been paid or the warrant for the dividend has not been posted within 30 days from the date of declaration, the following penalties can be levied.

(a)    Every director who is knowingly a party to the default will be punishable with imprisonment upto 2 years and with minimum fine of Rs. 1, 000/- per day during which such default continues.

(b)    The Company will have to pay interest @ 18% p.a. on the dividend amount for the period of delay.

Proviso to section 127 states that under cer-tain circumstances the above penalty under (ii)will not be leviable.

(iii)    It may be noted that the above minimum fine is leviable at fixed amount without reference to the amount of dividend in respect of which the default has occurred. To the extent the above penalty provisions are harsh.

(iv)    Section 127 has come into force from 12-09-2013.

6.    To Sum Up

6.1. The above provisions for Management and Administration of companies in the New Act are more or less on the same lines as the existing provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. These provisions are mostly procedural. The company management will have to comply with the new procedure in the day to day working. Some of the procedures have been streamlined in order to improve Corporate Governance and also to safeguard the interest of the stakeholders.

6.2 The provisions relating to declaration and payment of dividend have also been streamlined under the new Act. In order to protect the interest Fixed Depositors it is now provided that no dividend on equity shares can be declared during the period when default relating to repayment of Fixed Deposit or Interest due continues. However, the minimum fine to be levied for default relating to payment of dividend is fixed without reference to the amount of dividend involved. To this extent the provision is also harsh.

6.3 Taking an overall view of the provisions relating to management and administration of companies under the new Act, including provisions relating to declaration and payment of dividends, acceptance of public deposits and registration of charges it can be stated that these will streamline and simplify the day to day procedural requirements. The officers in charge of the management and administration of companies will have to be vigilant in complying with the new provisions to avoid any defaults. If the new provisions are complied with in the spirit in which they are enacted, the quality of Corporate Governance will improve to a great extent in the coming years.

GAP in GAAP— Acquisition of a Company with a Negative Net Worth

fiogf49gjkf0d
Consider Company X with assets of Rs. 120 and liabilities of Rs. 220, and consequently a negative net worth of Rs. 100, which comprises of accumulated losses of Rs. 120 and share capital of Rs. 20. Company Y acquires 51% shares of Company X, directly from promoters, for a consideration of Rs. 25. Accordingly, Company Y would recognize in the consolidated financial statements (CFS) a net liability of Rs100, goodwill of Rs. 76 and a negative minority interest (MI) of Rs. 49. The question is how does Company Y account for the negative MI of Rs. 49?

View 1: The negative MI of Rs. 49 is reduced againstthe parent’s reserves in the CFS.
The author believes that it may not be appropriate to record the unabsorbed losses on MI at the date of acquisition in the parent’s reserves in CFS. Recording unabsorbed minority losses in the parent’s reserves in CFS would carry a presumption that the parent always owned the entity. This presumption is obviously not correct and hence this view is not tenable.

View 2: The negative MI of Rs. 49 is included in goodwill on acquisition
In accordance with paragraph 13 of AS 21, goodwill is determined as follows

(a) the cost to the parent of its investment in each subsidiary and the parent’s portion of equity of each subsidiary, at the date on which investment in each subsidiary is made, should be eliminated;

(b) any excess of the cost to the parent of its investment in a subsidiary over the parent’s portion of equity of the subsidiary, at the date on which investment in the subsidiary is made, should be described as goodwill to be recognised as an asset in the consolidated financial statements;

The parent’s portion of the equity at the date of acquisition should also include the MI losses (since the minority does not absorb it the parent will have to absorb it). Thus on the basis of the above MI losses should also be included in goodwill. The total goodwill should therefore be Rs. 125. This view seems an acceptable alternative.

View 3: The negative MI of Rs. 49 is included in MI
Paragraph 26 of AS 21 Consolidated Financial Statements states: “The losses applicable to the minority in a consolidated subsidiary may exceed the minority interest in the equity of the subsidiary. The excess, and any further losses applicable to the minority, are adjusted against the majority interest except to the extent that the minority has a binding obligation to, and is able to, make good the losses. If the subsidiary subsequently reports profits, all such profits are allocated to the majority interest until the minority’s share of losses previously absorbed by the majority has been recovered.” Paragraph 13(e) states: Minority interests in the net assets consist of: (i) the amount of equity attributable to minorities at the date on which investment in a subsidiary is made; and (ii) the minorities’ share of movements in equity since the date the parent subsidiary relationship came in existence.

Paragraph 26, prohibits the recognition of negative MI, unless there is a binding obligation by the minority to make good the losses. Thus no negative MI can be recognised in the CFS. However a careful reading of paragraph 13(e) suggests that losses at the date of acquisition relating to minority are attributable to minority.

Thus a negative MI can be recorded at the date of acquisition. However, losses subsequent to the acquisition should not be attributed to the MI.

View 4: The negative MI of Rs. 49 is ignored
It is not possible to ignore the negative MI, as the balance sheet would not tally. Hence this view is ruled out.

The author’s opinion is that View 2 & View 3 are appropriate under the circumstances.

levitra

TS-527-ITAT-2013(Coch) English Indian Clays Ltd vs. ACIT (IT) A.Ys: 2004-2007, Dated: 18-10-2013

fiogf49gjkf0d
Section 9(1)(vii) – Providing report on market survey and identifying potential customers are consultancy services taxable as FTS under the Act.

Facts:

The Taxpayer, an Indian company, had entered into an agreement with a Foreign Company (FCo) to study the market situation in South East Asia for the product manufactured by the Taxpayer. The agreement referred to these services as ‘consultancy services’.

The Tax Authority observed that the services are in the nature of consultancy charges under the Act and liable for withholding taxes as FCo did not carry out marketing services but was required to conduct market survey and identify potential customers.

However, the Taxpayer argued that FCo was engaged only for the purpose of marketing the Taxpayer’s product in South East Asian countries.The nature of the transaction is required to be determined on the basis of the substance and not by the nomenclature. Hence the payments cannot be considered as consultancy charges. .

Held:

The work of FCo is to identify the potential customers and file a report regarding the market strategy and developmental studies. The Agreement does not enable FCo to market the products of Taxpayer in South East Asian countries. FCo had to provide a market survey report based on which the Taxpayer could market its product. Hence the payments were in the nature of consultancy charges taxable under the provisions of the Act.

levitra

TS-511-ITAT-2013(Coch) US Technology Resources Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT A.Ys: 2007-2008, Dated: 27-09-2013

fiogf49gjkf0d
Article 12(4), India-USA DTAA – Provision of advisory services in relation to assisting in management and decision making are technical in nature and satisfies the test of ‘make available’ as stipulated under the India-US DTAA. Accordingly it is taxable as fees for included services (FIS).

Facts:
The Taxpayer is an Indian company (ICo) engaged in providing software development services to the customers based in India.

ICo had engaged an American company (FCo) to provide assistance, advice and support to ICo in management, decision making, sales and business development, financial decision making, legal matters and public relations activities, treasury service, risk management service and any other management support as may be mutually agreed between the parties.

For the above services, ICo made certain payments to FCo without deducting taxes and claimed the deduction for the same. I Co contended that the services rendered by FCo are mainly in the form of assistance in decision making; therefore, such services are clearly in the nature of management services, which is outside the ambit of definition of “FIS” under India USA DTAA. Further, it was argued that these services do not ‘make available’ any technical knowledge or expertise such that the person acquiring the service is enabled to apply the technology.

However the Tax Authority disallowed the payments on the grounds that such payments to non-residents were in the nature of consultancy fees on which tax was required to be withheld u/s. 195 of the Act. Also as soon as the advice or support is received, the same is available to ICo for using them in the decision making process of the management. Therefore, it may not be correct to say that the technical services were not ‘made available’ to ICo.

In terms of Article 12(4) of India-USA DTAA, FIS means payments of any kind to any person in consideration for rendering of any technical or consultancy services (including through the provision of services of technical or other personnel), if such services made available technical knowledge, etc.

Held:
Memorandum of Understanding between India and USA makes it clear that only services which are technical in nature can be considered for included services. Even consultancy services should be technical in nature.

The services rendered by FCo were used by ICo for making various management decisions. Tribunal also referred to the definitions of terms “management” and “decision making” from various management authors and observed that “Decision making is an act of selecting the suitable solution to the problems from various available alternative solutions to guide actions towards achievement of desired objectives”.

The knowledge accumulated by FCo through study, experience and experimentation with regard to management, finance, risk, etc. of a particular business is nothing but technical knowledge. In the era of technology transformation, the information/ experience gathered by FCo relating to financial risk management of business is technical knowledge. The knowledge and expertise of FCo would be used to support ICo in selecting suitable solution after considering all the alternatives available. Further FCo was giving training to the employees of ICo in making use of the inputs, experience, experimentation, etc. for taking better decision in order to achieve the desired objectives/goals.

The information and expertise made available to ICo was very much available with them and it could be used in future whenever the occasion arises.

Thus the management services provided by FCo were in the nature of FIS as per India-USA DTAA and subject to withholding tax in India.

levitra

TS-555-ITAT-2013(Mum) M/s. A.P. Moller vs. DDIT (IT) A.Ys: 1997-2004, Dated: 08-11-2013

fiogf49gjkf0d
Article 9, India-Denmark DTAA – Fiscally transparent Danish partnership qualifies for benefits under India-Denmark DTAA; management of a business by a representative cannot lead to an inference that the income of the entity whose business is managed belongs to the representative.

Facts:
The Taxpayer is a partnership firm established under the laws of Denmark. The Taxpayer is “managing owner” of two shipping companies (FCos) incorporated under Danish law. The shipping business and the vessels belong to FCos, which are engaged in the shipping business in international traffic at the global level.

FCos were tax resident of Denmark and also had their place of effective management (POEM) in Denmark.

The Taxpayer managed the shipping business of FCos throughout the world, including India, and also filed corporate tax return on behalf of FCos in India (which had been merged), showing the gross receipts from the shipping income in India and claiming benefits under Article 9 of India-Denmark DTAA wherein profits derived from operation of ships in international traffic are taxable only in the country in which the POEM of the enterprise is situated.

The Tax Authority contended that income from shipping business is taxable in the hands of the Taxpayer as there is no difference between FCos and the Taxpayer, which was acting as the former’s beneficial owner. A person who is a resident of contracting State is entitled to treaty benefit of a DTAA if income of such a person is subjected to tax in the resident country. As per the tax laws of Denmark, the partnership firm is regarded as a fiscally transparent entity. It is not taxed at the entity level but its partners are taxed on the income earned by the partnership firm. Since the Taxpayer is a fiscally transparent entity, the India-Denmark DTAA benefits are not available to it.

Held:
On applicability of benefits of India-Denmark DTAA to a fiscally transparent entity:
• A person who is resident of a contracting state is entitled to treaty benefits if it is liable to tax in that state. As per Danish laws, the partnership firm, as such, is not taxable.
• However, the entire income of the partnership firm is taxed in the hands of its partners and, therefore, the entire income earned by the partnership firm can be said to be fully taxable in the resident state.
• As long as income of the partnership is taxed, albeit in the hands of the partners in the resident state, the India-Denmark DTAA benefits cannot be denied. The basic purpose is whether or not the entire income is taxable in the resident state. The mode of taxability, whether in the hands of partnership or the partners, cannot be given much credence so long as the income is fully taxed in the resident state.
• Reliance was placed on the Tribunal’s ruling in the case of Linklaters LLP, [2012] 132 TTJ (Mum.) 20, to conclude that, even though the partnership firm is a transparent entity, once its income and profit is taxed in the hands of the partners, the treaty benefits should be extended to the partnership firm.

On taxability of shipping income:

• As per the Articles of Association of FCos, the Taxpayer acts as a representative of FCo and, in that capacity, it acts and carries out obligations on behalf of FCo and also files corporate tax return in India on its behalf.
• The Taxpayer can be compared to a CEO of a company who is managing the affairs of the company and this does not lead to any inference that the income of the company belongs to the CEO.
• Thus, the shipping income belongs to FCo only and not to the Taxpayer. Accordingly, the exemption under Article 9 was available to FCo, being resident of Denmark.

levitra

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow, [2012] 47 VST 66 (All)

fiogf49gjkf0d
Sales Tax-Sale Price-Goods Kept in Bonded Warehouse by The Manufacturer Outside the State- Excise Duty Paid by The Purchaser Outside the State-Forms Part of Turnover-section 2(h) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Facts:

The company had transferred petroleum products from its bonded warehouse to bonded warehouse of other marketing companies situated outside the State of UP and excise duty was paid by the purchaser of goods when goods were removed from the bonded warehouse. The assessing authorities included the amount of excise duty paid by the purchaser in turnover of sales and levied tax under the CST Act. The assessment order passed by the assessing authority was confirmed by the Tribunal. The petitioner company filed a petition before the Allahabad High court against the order passed by the Tribunal.

Held

The excise duty is leviable on the manufacture of product and it is at the point of removal. No goods can be removed from the factory or warehouse without the payment of duty. Therefore the initial liability to pay the excise duty was on the manufacturer while removing goods from the factory to its warehouse. However, if the permission is granted to remove the goods from the factory or warehouse to another warehouse licensed u/s. 140 belonging to some other person, without payment of duty, the duty is payable on the clearance of goods from such warehouse. In such circumstances the payment of duty is only deferred or extended from the stage of removal of goods from the factory to warehouse of the manufacturer or purchaser, but the liability to pay the excise duty, which is chargeable and payable under the act, by the manufacturer does not cease. The incidence of excise duty is directly relatable to manufacture but its collection can be deferred to later stage as a measure of convenience or expediency.

The court after following various decisions of the SC held that the excise duty paid by the purchaser is liable to be included in sale price for the purpose of the levy of tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

levitra

State of Tamil Nadu vs. Sri Ram Packages [2012] 47 VST 59 (Mad)

fiogf49gjkf0d
Central Sales Tax–Deemed Export-Sale of Packing Material to Exporter-Export by Agent of Purchasing Exporter-Exempt ion Allowed-Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, section 5(3)

Facts
The Department filed a petition before the Madras High Court against the order of Tribunal allowing claim of exemption from payment of tax on sale of packing material to the exporter although actual export was made by the agent.

Held

The Tribunal has recorded findings of facts that as per the contract the person who exported yarn is an agent of the buyer and concluded the transaction as falling under the category of principal/ agency transaction and allowed the claim. The Tribunal has thus reached a finding of a fact with reference to the transaction of the assessee by way of agency sale to an exporter and there is no scope to hold otherwise. Accordingly, the petition filed by the department was dismissed.

levitra

Modi Industries Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and Others [2012] 47 VST 47 (All)

fiogf49gjkf0d
Sick Industrial Unit-BIFR-Recovery Of Dues-As Per Assessment Order After Remand-Passed After Cut Off Date-For Period Prior to Cut Off Date-Is Current Outstanding Dues-Protected By Rehabilitation Scheme-Sick Industrial Companies (Special Protection) Act, 1985.

Facts
BIFR by order dated 12-03-2007, prepared rehabilitation scheme for the petitioner having cutoff date as of 30-06-2007. The UP Commercial Tax Department applied to BIFR to allow recovery of current dues. The BIFR passed order dated 26- 03-2008 permitting the Department to recover the current dues. The company filed writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against the said order passed by the BIFR.

Held
The words “outstanding dues” and “current dues” are to be understood in the context of rehabilitation scheme prepared by the BIFR, and the object and purpose of section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Protection) Act, 1985. The objectof preparing rehabilitation scheme is to give a protective umbrella to the sick units for rehabilitation to provide for deferment or for a different treatment of the payment of current dues, prior to the cut-off date which may be termed as outstanding dues. The current dues for the purpose of rehabilitation scheme are those which fall due after the cut-off date. The liabilities created, taxes falling due, assessed and demand rise after the cut-off date, do not fall within the provision of section 22 of the SICA Act. Any demand in pursuance of the assessment order, prior to the cut-off date had to be classified as outstanding dues to be protected by the scheme. In the case of reassessment, after remand of a period prior to cut-off date, the dues do not partake the character of current dues and is protected by the rehabilitation scheme. Accordingly, the writ petition filed by the company was allowed.

levitra

[2013] 38 taxmann.com 298 (Ahmedabad – CESTAT), Kothari Infotech Ltd. vs. CCE

fiogf49gjkf0d
Whether refund in respect of service tax paid on services exported in terms of Export of Service Rules, 2005 can be denied, if exporter service provider failed to file declaration required under Notification No. 12/2005? Held, No.

Facts:

The appellant was marketing agent of various printing machines in India supplied by its foreign supplier. It filed refund claim on 03-11-2008 in respect of service tax paid between the period from 13-04-06 to 09-02-07 under the category of “Business Auxiliary Service” on the ground that it was providing services as a commission agent to its foreign supplier and consideration in the form of commission in convertible foreign exchange. The appellant further contended that it was never liable to service tax under the category of “Business Auxiliary Service.”

Held:

The Tribunal held that, the services in the instant case constitute ‘export’ under Export of Service Rules, 2005 and hence, Rule 5 of Export of Service Rules, 2005 would be applicable. Non-filing of declaration vis-à-vis satisfying all the conditions under the said Rule 5 read with notification 12/2005-ST dated 19th April 2005 requires to be examined, the Tribunal referred to the judgment in the case of Manubhai & Co. vs. CST [Final Order No. A/1446/2010-WZB/Ahd., dated 17-9-2010 had clearly held that the requirement of filing of declaration is of procedural nature under notification and delay, if any, can be condoned. The Tribunal thus allowed refund claim file subject to the appellant filing declarations as required under the said notification read with Export of Service Rules, 2005 before the adjudicating authority.
levitra

[2013] 38 taxmann.com 142 (Mumbai – CESTAT) I2IT (P.) Ltd. vs. CCE

fiogf49gjkf0d
Whether mess charges and hostel fees, laptop charges are to be included in the value of ‘Commercial Training and Coaching Services’? Held, No.

Facts:
The appellant was engaged in imparting education to students enrolled with them for various courses in fields of management, engineering and information technology. Issue before the Tribunal was whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax on that part of the value including mess charges, hostel charges and payment for the laptops supplied to the students.

Held:
The Tribunal held that, these charges are not consideration received for the providing the service of commercial coaching or training. Mess charges and hostel fees are for providing boarding and lodging to the students and cannot be attributed to the training or coaching rendered. Similarly, the amount recovered for the supply of laptops also cannot be attributed to the services rendered (it relates to supply of goods) and therefore, these amounts collected towards mess charges, hostel charges and laptops are excludable from the taxable value of the service rendered.

levitra

2013 38 taxmann.com 145 (New Delhi – CESTAT) Gargi Consultants (P.) Ltd. vs. CCE, Allahabad

fiogf49gjkf0d
Whether extended period is invokable if decision of Tribunal during the relevant period is in favour of the assessee but is subsequently reversed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court? Held, No.

Facts:

The appellant was engaged in providing “computer training” services during FY 2004-05 and was registered under the category of “Commercial Coaching & Training” service. Show-cause was issued demanding service tax on the ground that during the period July 2004 to March 2005 it has provided “computer training” and has not discharged service tax liability on the same. Appellant contended that that during the relevant period, all the decisions of the Tribunal were in its favour. Appellant also contended that the ‘computer training’ was vocational training and therefore exempt vide notification 9/2003-S.T. 12-06-2003 read with subsequent notification No. 24/2004-ST dated 10- 09-2004. Further it stated that the exemption in relation to ‘computer training’ was withdrawn vide notification 16-06-2005 and thus the same cannot have retrospective effect.

Held:

The Tribunal held that, although the issue on merits was no longer res integra, during the relevant period as Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunwin (supra) held during the period from 10-09-2004 to 15-06-2005, an assessee providing “computer training” services was required to pay service tax in as much as the subsequent notification effective from 16-06-2005 was only a clarificatory notification and was effective retrospectively. The Tribunal further held as such, there was a bona fide belief on the part of the appellant not to pay service tax on the “computer training services” on the basis of decisions being in its favour at that point of time. Thus, in the instant case, there was a bona fide belief on the part of the appellant and hence invocation of extended period was not justifiable.
levitra