TMI
June 17
itatonline
June 17
Executive Officer, Jalandhar Improvement Trust Versus Income-tax Officer TDS-II, Jalandhar - 2015 (6) TMI 475 - ITAT AMRITSAR - Income Tax
Non deduction of TDS u/s 194C - Payment in pursuance of legal obligation, whether in the nature of contract - Payments to Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board - Held that - Such payments are out of legal obligations rather than contractual arrangements, and it is only when payments are made in pursuance of a contract that the provisions of section 194C come into play. The contract may be oral or written, express or implied but there must be a contract nevertheless. In the present case, however.......itatonline
Aug 31
SG
Yet Again; one more feather added!
HC criticize Department for not giving legitimate credit of TDS to Assessee for its own shortcomings
TM
BS
How to claim tax refunds |
It is easiest to claim refund while filing returns. But if you have not done so, use Form 30
|
The scope, as suggested, for the filing of a claim for refund using Form No.30 is not readily under stood, in the new computerised environment; to be precise, in view of the changed mandatory requirement to e’file tax return and strictly in the applicable prescribed form, with no attachment – annexure. May be, the suggestion is not without reason, known only to the writer.
Be that as it should, on the other hand, as one looks at it, the prospects of procuring a refund simply because the tax return throws up a refund situation do not seem to be all that rosy or hassle- free. For knowing why so, the implications of lately enacted section 200A and section 201 (2) require to be closely examined and kept in view on a case by case basis. This aspect may be found to have been touched upon in, among others in public domain, the write-up on the website of Taxguru@ Section 194IA of I T Act- A Critique (Supplement)
<> Instances of Lacunae
BL
Section 54B is applicable only to individuals and not to any other assessee this is because the section uses the expression used by “his or a parent of his” which clearly indicate that the “assessee” refers to an individual. [CIT v Devarajalu (G.K.) (1991) 191 ITR 211 (Mad)]........
Section 54B is applicable only to individuals and not to any other assessee this is because the section uses the expression used by “his or a parent of his” which clearly indicate that the “assessee” refers to an individual. [CIT v Devarajalu (G.K.) (1991) 191 ITR 211 (Mad)]. - See more at: http://www.accommodationtimes.com/real-estate-news/assessment-of-builders-and-developers/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AccommodationTimes+%28Accommodation+Times%29&utm_content=Yahoo%21+Mail#sthash.vgIl0RMT.dpuf
[1991] 56 TAXMANN 85 (MAD)
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Commissioner of Income-tax
v.
G.K. Devarajulu
RATNAM AND SOMASUNDARAM. JJ.
TAX CASE NO. 291 OF 1980
DECEMBER 19,1990
BL
Xcerpts >
The CBDT accordingly issued instructions aimed at speedy disposal of applications filed by taxpayers for rectifying incorrect demands (two months from receipt of application and rectifying TDS mismatches).
Though welcome, the directions need to be implemented effectively and in a time-bound manner. Especially because the onus is on the taxpayer to approach the Income-Tax Department to get his/ her records corrected, and income-tax officers still retain the authority for disposing of grievances.
itatonline
16th JulyCBDT Instruction Regarding Grant Of Interest U/s 244A On Refunds
BL
Taxpayers to get unique number for complaints
itatonline
Recent Circular >
CBDT Instructions On S. 143(1) Intimations And S. 154 Rectifications
SG
“C.4. The order ‘under section 154 of Income-tax Act MUST FULFILL ALL THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, SHOULD BE A SPEAKING ORDER and has TO BE INVARIABLY COMMUNICATED to the taxpayer immediately after its disposal.” (Capital Supplied)
The issuance of instructions by the Ministry, this time for a change with more clarity of purpose in mind, is a timely step and welcome. Can be no denying that the gullible taxpayers have been suffering helplessly but patiently the innumerable woes in the face of inter alia the demonstrably chaotic TDS regime for too long to be justified; but since given fresh hopes.
A couple of aspects worth a double underlining:
1. The “contents” of the Circular, addressed to the two top heads, with CCs to certain others,would require to be , in turn, necessarily passed on and reached to the ATTENTION of each one of the field authorities’ desk, addressed to personal name. All the more imperative, to be made clear that any failure to strictly adhere to and comply with any of the instructions, not only in letter but also spirit, would invite personal action on the ‘presumptive’ ground of not having acted “in the performance of his duties”, as warranted by the law (same way as in the case of any other “public servant”); and that all the attendant consequences to follow.
2, The field authorities are, no doubt, even in the normal course, expected to be fully aware, and also MADE A CONSCIOUS NOTE OF / bear in mind the purport and true import of the words / expressions highlighted in the above extracted portion of the Circular for their purposes / in their own interest. Even so, it might be worthwhile for the Ministry / CBDT to follow up by making those more than clear and sufficiently impressed. Especially, having noted that similarly worded circulars / directives issued in recent times have, by and large, not served the intended objects, by making an impact and change in the field reality. All the more important for the Ministry / CBDT is to keep closely monitoring the outcome, with a sincerity of purpose in the profound sense.
Now, over to the Experts, the self-professed ‘social activists’ among them in particular; in the fervent expectation of useful contribution, aimed at accomplishing the ultimate objective of “public interest” (-in the same sense as made out by the Delhi High Court in Court on Its Own Motion vs. UOI 352 ITR 273).
No comments:
Post a Comment