Financial Reporting Dossier

From Published Accounts

The Limit of Long – Range Forecasting in Goodwill Impairment Reliability, Avoiding Optimism Bias and the Discipline of IND AS 36

Significant Beneficial Ownership (SBO) Under The Companies Act 2013: A Study

A Comprehensive Analysis Of India’s New Labour Codes And Their Impact On Financial Statements

The Pillar of Audit Integrity – Engagement Quality Control Reviewer (EQCR)

Chatting Up About India: Part I Lipid Profile Of Regulatory Cholesterol

Business Responsibility And Sustainability Reporting (BRSR)

Bilateralism In An Era Of Protectionism – The India–Us Trade Deal In Perspective

Allied Laws

Company Law

Redeemable Preference Shares – Debt or Equity?

The Rise of Algorithmic Trading In Securities Market: Retail Participation and Regulatory Shifts

Glimpses Of Supreme Court Rulings

Equalisation levy — Refund — Interest on refund — Refund granted as excess Equalisation levy paid by assessee after three years — Obligation on Department to pay interest as compensation for use and retention of money collected in excess — Department’s contention that statute does not provide for payment of interest on refund of equalisation levy not tenable — High Court directed the Department to pay interest at the rate of six per cent from April 1 of the year following the financial year in which excess payments made by assessee till date of actual refund.

Intimation u/s. 143(1) — Adjustment to the return of income — First proviso — Mandatory in nature — No adjustment to be made unless an opportunity is given to the assessee — No prior opportunity to the assessee before making adjustment — Intimation u/s. 143(1) is liable to be quashed and set-aside.

Power of Tribunal — Admission of additional evidence — Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963 — Admission only at the instance of the Tribunal — Parties to the appeal are not entitled as a matter of right to produce additional evidence — Order of the Tribunal allowing the admission of additional evidence held to be in gross violation of the procedure contemplated under Rule 29 — Order of the Tribunal liable to be set-aside.

Revision — Erroneous and prejudicial order — Lack of proper enquiry — Initiation of 263 at the instance of the AO cannot be done — Finding of the Tribunal well founded — Reliance upon notes submitted by the assessee before the AO — Cannot be stated that the AO did not consider all the factors and accepted the plea of the assessee and completed assessment — CIT is required to consider the explanation offered and take a decision — Failure to render any finding by CIT — Revision u/s. 263 not sustainable.

Revision of order u/s. 264 — Power of Commissioner — Assessee filed return in wrong Form and later corrected it, claiming exemption u/s. 54F — Assessee’s CA failed to respond to notice u/s. 142(1) resulting in passing of assessment order ex parte making additions — Revision application u/s. 264 filed before Principal CIT with all materials — Principal CIT accepted assessee’s case on merits in order but rejected revision application as not maintainable — Rejection based solely on earlier failure to respond to notice during assessment proceeding proceedings — Power of Commissioner u/s. 264 wide to remedy bona fide mistakes — Earlier non-compliance with notice cannot render subsequent revision application not maintainable — Order rejecting revision application quashed and matter remanded to Principal CIT.

Settlement Commission — Settlement of cases — Rectification of order of settlement u/s. 245D(6B) — Period of limitation — Application beyond six months of order — Barred by limitation —Petition of the Revenue was dismissed.

Sec 264 – Revision – Binding precedent – Authority refusing to follow Special Bench decision of the ITAT- judicial discipline ought to be maintained and cannot be deviated from on the ground that the order passed by the superior authority is “not acceptable” to the department.

Sec 264 – Revision – Communication treating a return as Invalid return u/s. 139(9) of the Act – is an order – revision maintainable.

Section 44AB as well 271B clearly show that the requirement of audit and penal consequence are dehors the finding of the assessment proceedings relating to the computation of income and audit u/s 44AB is required on the basis of the turnover exceeding the threshold limit.

Protective addition under Section 69 cannot survive where substantive addition on identical facts has been deleted on merits and no independent corroborative evidence establishes payment of on-money. Mere reliance on third-party statements, without independent corroboration, is insufficient when the assessee categorically denies payment.

An order passed without considering a binding precedent, though not cited at the time of hearing, constitutes a mistake apparent on record.

Where the assessee-company operating a solar power plant supplied electricity exclusively to its holding company, the activity could not be regarded as being carried out for “preservation of environment” / “charitable purpose” under section 2(15), as the dominant object was to benefit a single related entity rather than the public at large or a defined section of the public; accordingly, the assessee was not entitled to registration under section 12AB.

A securitisation trust formed in accordance with the SARFAESI Act and RBI Guidelines is a revocable trust within the meaning of section 61 / 63 and consequently its income is not chargeable to tax in the hands of trust but in the hands of the Security Receipt Holders; accordingly, such trust cannot be assessed as an AOP under section 164.

Where the assessee had utilised its limited funds mainly for construction of a Satsang Bhawan in accordance with its charitable objects, its mere inability to carry out other charitable activities on account of paucity of funds could not be a ground for denial of registration under section 12AB / section 80G.

Article 8 of India-Ireland DTAA – in absence of specific notification under Section 90 of the Act, DTAA cannot be said to have been modified through Multilateral Instrument ; on facts, consideration received by Irish company from dry lease of aircraft was taxable only in Ireland under Article 8 of India-Ireland DTAA

Increased Life Expectancy: When Life Outruns Professional Career

From The President

The Jurisprudence of Hearings under GST

Goods And Services Tax

Recent Developments in GST

आत्मपुण्येन भाग्यवान्

ICAI and Its Members

Gen Z

Regulatory Referencer

59th Members’ Residential Refresher Course – A Report

Learning Events at BCAS

Tech Mantra