From Published Accounts

Current Or Non-Current – Decoding The New Rules Under Ind As 1

Amplifying an Auditor’s Obligation: Analysis of NFRA’s Order

GST Refunds Under Inverted Duty Structure

Income Tax Act, 2025 – An Overview

Rising Role of Shareholder Activism in Corporate Governance

Taxation of Charitable & Religious Organisations under Income Tax Act 2025

Allied Laws

Company Law

Law Of Escheat

Guarding Market Integrity: The Evolving Contours of SEBI’S PFUTP Framework

Glimpses of Supreme Court Rulings

Applicability of section 132A — Stolen property — Theft at the premises of the assessee — Criminal Case — Stolen property found by the police — Application to the Trial Court for possession of the stolen property — Objection by the Income-tax Department — Ownership documents submitted by the assessee — Objection of the Tax Department not maintainable.

Business expenditure — Disallowance u/s. 40A(3) — Cash payment in excess of prescribed limit — Effect of s. 40A and rule 6DD — Payments to agents cannot be disallowed — Meaning of agent — Assessee’s supervisor acting as agent of assessee, and accounting to him for amounts received and disbursed to individual labourers — Supervisors not sub-contractors and payments made by them to labourers on assessee’s behalf not to be disallowed u/s. 40A(3).

Charitable institution — Exemption u/s. 11 — Charitable purpose — Applicability of proviso to s. 2(15) — Donations received from donors after deducting an amount shown as deduction of tax at source u/s. 194C and 194J — AO treating receipts as consultancy fees and contractual income based on deduction of tax at source rejected exemption u/s. 11 — Assessee’s revision petition u/s. 264 was rejected — Held, proviso to s. 2(15) cannot be invoked alleging that services rendered in relation to trade, commerce or business — Provison under which donor deducted tax alone could not determine nature of receipt — No element of trade, commerce or business activity established — Assessee is entitled to exemption — Assessment order and order rejecting revision petition set aside.

Deduction u/s. 80-IA :— (A) Interest on FD — Funds kept aside periodically by way of FD — Obligation under the license agreement to replace cranes after a certain period — Funds parked in FD to meet contractual obligation — Funds were also parked in FD under a compliance order of the High Court due to a tariff dispute between the assessee and TAMP — Placement of FD imperative for the business — FD was not created for parking of surplus funds — Interest is eligible for deduction u/s. 80-IA: (B) Interest on TDS refund — TDS wrongly deducted by customers — TDS was directly part of sales receipt of the assessee — Interest on TDS refund arose due to excess TDS deducted by the customers against the payment to be made to the assessee — TDS was part of business receipt of the assessee — Assessee entitled to deduction u/s. 80-IA on interest received by it on TDS refunded to it.

General Anti-Avoidance Rules — Scope of —Impermissible Avoidance Agreement — Purchase and sale of shares — Cumulative effect of purchase and sale of shares results in loss — No strong material established by the Department to show applicability of s. 96(1) except the timing of transaction — GAAR provisions not applicable — Order passed u/s. 144BA(6) set-aside.

TDS — Payment without TDS — Disallowance u/s. 40a(ia) — Applicability of proviso to 40a(ia) — Inserted by Finance Act 2013 with effect from 01/04/2013 — Curative and beneficial in nature —Retrospective effect from 01/04/2005 — No dispute as that the recipients had paid taxes on such payments — No disallowance can be made u/s. 40a(ia)

Penalty 270 A – Writ – Alternate remedy- No virtual hearing was given to the Petitioner as mandated by the Faceless Penalty (Amendment) Scheme, 2022: AY 2017-18

It is a well-established principle of law that treatment given by the Assessee in its books of account is not decisive/conclusive for determining the taxable income under the Act.

Imposition of penalty for violation of provisions of section 269SS of the Act towards consideration received in cash for sale of agricultural land by bringing the said consideration within the ambit of “specified sum” as defined under section 269SS of the Act is totally incorrect and defeats the very purpose of law.

As per the provisions of section 70(2) of the Act, the short-term capital loss can be set off against gain from any other capital asset. Section 70(2) of the Act does not make any further classification between the transactions where STT was paid and the transactions where STT was not paid.

Claim for deduction, made in belated return filed under section 139(4), of capital gains under sections 54F and 54EC, not liable to penalty under section 271(1)(c).

Enhancement made by CIT(A), by exercising a power not conferred by section 251(2) being without jurisdiction needs to be deleted.

Application for final approval under section 80G(5)(iv)(B) cannot be denied on the ground that the applicant had claimed exemption under section 11 / 10(23C) in the past. Amendment in section 80G(5)(iv) made by Finance Act 2024 is clarificatory in nature and applies retrospectively.

Where the employer paid a sum to LIC under a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) for allotment of annuity policy in favour of an employee payable in instalments in future, such sum cannot be taxed as perquisite in the hands of the employee in the year of purchase of annuity since the employee did not acquire any vested or enforceable right over the said amount in the relevant assessment year.

Where draft assessment order is passed in the name of a non-existent entity despite the Assessing Officer having been duly informed of the amalgamation, such an assessment is void and not a procedural irregularity that can be cured by invoking section 292B.

Presumption set out in Section 292C of the Act does not apply since the documents in question was not found or impounded from the appellant’s premises but in the course of survey (not search) conducted against a third party.

Estimation of Income – Rejection of Books – Section 145(3) – Failure to conduct audit under Section 44AB – Income declared at 0.187% of turnover – Assessing Officer estimated income @ 10% of turnover – Tribunal held that in absence of audit and proper explanation for drastic fall in profits, estimation justified but rate excessive – Past effective NP rate of 1.52% accepted – Addition restricted accordingly – Partly in favour of assessee.

Article 5 of India – USA DTAA – Indian subsidiary of foreign parent company cannot constitute dependent agent permanent establishment merely because it provided marketing support activity, and in absence of PE, receipts of foreign company were taxable only in USA.

DDT cannot be charged on dividend paid to a shareholder who is granted immunity from taxation

A Partial Reform: Income Tax Act, 1961 2025

From The President

Pre-Deposits

Goods And Services Tax

Recent Developments in GST

AIZ – MAKA / FALEA – TUKA

Working Papers

ICAI And Its Members

Is It Fair To Discriminate TDS Unfairly Over Advance Tax? The Curious Case Of Section 234B Of The Indian Income Tax Act

Letter To The Editor

Miscellanea

Regulatory Referencer

29th International Tax and Finance Conference

Learning Events At BCAS

Statistically Speaking