{"id":8066,"date":"2020-07-08T09:51:09","date_gmt":"2020-07-08T04:21:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/?p=8066"},"modified":"2020-07-08T09:51:09","modified_gmt":"2020-07-08T04:21:09","slug":"oppression-mismanagement-related-resolution-out-of-section-562x-of-the-income-tax-act-1961","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/oppression-mismanagement-related-resolution-out-of-section-562x-of-the-income-tax-act-1961\/","title":{"rendered":"Oppression Mismanagement Related Resolution Out Of Section 56(2)(x) Of The Income-tax Act 1961"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-content\/uploads\/Ashish-Chadha-e1594134122832.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"78\" height=\"100\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-6250\" \/><strong>CA Ashish Chadha has explained the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Rule 11UAC of the Income-tax Rules 1962 (which was inserted vide Notification No. 40\/2020 dated 29th June 2020). He has pointed out the Rule provides relief from the levy of income-tax in case of resolution of stressed companies under specific scenarios, where the resolution is either initiated by the Central Government keeping the public interest in mind, i.e. the cases involving oppression and mismanagement, or in special cases like that of Yes Bank<\/strong> <\/p>\n<p><strong><u>Background<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  The provisions of Section 56 of the  Income-tax Act 1961 (&lsquo;the Act&rsquo;) dealing with the incomes falling under the head  &lsquo;<em>Income from Other Sources<\/em>&rsquo; specify that every kind of income which is  not to be excluded from the total income and is not chargeable under any other  head specified under Section 14 of the Act, shall be chargeable to income-tax  under this head. The provisions of sub-section (2) to Section 56 prescribe  certain specific incomes which shall be charged to income-tax under this head.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>\n  In order to prevent the practice of  receiving sum of money or property without consideration or for inadequate  consideration, the Finance Act 2017 inserted a new clause (x) in Section 56(2)  of the Act. The provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Act provide that receipt  of sum of money or property by any person without consideration or for  inadequate consideration in excess of INR 50,000 shall be chargeable to tax in  the hands of the recipient under the head &lsquo;<em>Income from Other Sources<\/em>&rsquo;.<\/p>\n<p>\n  With regard to receipt of property other than  immovable property, the provisions of sub-clause (c) under clause (x) to  sub-section (2) of Section 56 of the Act specify that in a case where a person  receives the propertyfrom any other person, on or after 1 April 2017:<\/p>\n<p>&#9658; Without consideration, the fair market value of  which exceeds INR 50,000, the whole of the fair market value shall be  considered as its income;<\/p>\n<p>&#9658; For a consideration less than the fair market value  by an amount exceeding INR 50,000, the fair market value as exceeds such  consideration shall be considered as its income.<\/p>\n<p>The Explanation under clause (x) provides  that the expression &lsquo;<em>fair market value<\/em>&rsquo; of a property, other than an  immovable property means the value determined in accordance with Rule 11UA of  the Income-tax Rules, 1962.<\/p>\n<p>\n  Further, the proviso under clause (x)  provides for certain exceptions, wherein the provisions of clause (x) to  Section 56(2) of the Act shall not apply.<\/p>\n<p>\n  The Government, in the Finance Bill 2019,  stated that the determination of fair market value based on the prescribed  rules may result into genuine hardship in certain cases where the consideration  for transfer of shares is approved by certain authorities and the person  transferring the shares has no control over such determination. Accordingly,  the Finance Act 2019 inserted a new clause (XI) under the proviso to Section  56(2)(x) of the Act. The relevant provisions read as under:<\/p>\n<p>\n  &ldquo;<em>Provided  that this clause shall not apply to any sum of money or any property received&mdash;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <em>&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><em>(XI) from such  class of persons and subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed.<\/em><\/strong>&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>\n  <strong><u>Introduction of Rule 11UAC<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  Now, in exercise of the powers conferred by  the above clause (XI) of the proviso to Section 56(2)(x) of the Act, the  Central Board of Direct Taxes (&lsquo;CBDT&rsquo;) has inserted a new Rule 11UAC in the  Income-tax Rules 1962, vide Notification No. 40\/2020 issued on 29 June 2020. As  per the said notification, such rules shall come into force from 1 April 2020  and shall be applicable for Assessment Year (&lsquo;AY&rsquo;) 2020-21 and subsequent AYs.<\/p>\n<p>\n  The newly inserted Rule 11UAC prescribes  the class of persons to which the provisions of clause (x) of sub-section (2)  of Section 56 shall not apply. The provisions of this newly inserted rule have  been encapsulated hereunder in brief:<\/p>\n<p>\n&#9658; In a case where the shareholder receives unquoted  shares, the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Act shall not apply if all  the following conditions are fulfilled: <\/p>\n<p>\n(a)The Central Government has moved an application  against a company before the National Company Law Tribunal (&lsquo;NCLT&rsquo;) under  Section 241 of the Companies Act 2013, which empowers the members of the  company and the Central Government to make an application before the NCLT in  situations where the company&rsquo;s affairs are being conducted in a manner  prejudicial to public interest, etc.;\n<\/p>\n<p>\n(b) Based on the above application, the NCLT has  suspended the Board of Directors of the company and appointed new Directors  nominated by the Central Government under Section 242 of the Companies Act  2013;\n<\/p>\n<p>\n(c) A reasonable opportunity of being heard is given to  the jurisdictional Principal Commissioner\/ Commissioner of Income-tax;\n<\/p>\n<p>\n(d) The resolution plan is approved by the NCLT; and\n<\/p>\n<p>\n(e) The shareholder receives unquoted shares of the  company and its subsidiary and the subsidiary of its subsidiary pursuant to the  resolution plan so approved. For the purposes of this clause, a company would  be considered as a subsidiary of another company if such other company holds  more than half in nominal value of the equity share capital of the company.\n<\/p>\n<p>\n&#9658; In case of receipt of shares by an investor bank,  the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Act would not apply if all the  following conditions are fulfilled:\n<\/p>\n<p>\n(a) The shares are allotted under the Yes Bank Limited  Reconstruction Scheme, 2020 (&lsquo;Yes Bank Scheme&rsquo;) notified by the Ministry of  Finance; and\n<\/p>\n<p>\n(b) The shares are allotted at a price specified in the  Yes Bank Scheme.\n<\/p>\n<p><strong><u>Impression<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\n  As per the Memorandum to Finance Bill 2019,  the amendments empowering the CBDT were introduced to facilitate resolution of  stressed companies. In line with the above intent, the CBDT has issued the  notification giving relief from the levy of income-tax in case of resolution of  stressed companies under specific scenarios described above. The CBDT has  adopted a taxpayer-friendly approach towards the resolution of stressed  companies, where the resolution has been either initiated by the Central  Government keeping the public interest in mind, i.e. the cases involving  oppression and mismanagement, or is a special case like that of Yes Bank  Limited.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<table width=\"103%\" border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"5\" cellspacing=\"0\" bgcolor=\"#FFFFCC\">\n<tr>\n<td><strong>Disclaimer: <\/strong>The  contents of this document are solely for informational purpose. It does not  constitute professional advice or a formal recommendation. While due care has  been taken in preparing this document, the existence of mistakes and omissions  herein is not ruled out. Neither the author nor itatonline.org and its  affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising  out of any inaccurate or incomplete information in this document nor for any  actions taken in reliance thereon. No part of this document should be  distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without  express written permission of itatonline.org<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>CA Ashish Chadha has explained the provisions of Section 56(2)(x) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Rule 11UAC of the Income-tax Rules 1962 (which was inserted vide Notification No. 40\/2020 dated 29th June 2020). He has pointed out the Rule provides relief from the levy of income-tax in case of resolution of stressed companies under specific scenarios, where the resolution is either initiated by the Central Government keeping the public interest in mind, i.e. the cases involving oppression and mismanagement, or in special cases like that of Yes Bank<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/oppression-mismanagement-related-resolution-out-of-section-562x-of-the-income-tax-act-1961\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8066","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8066","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8066"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8066\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8066"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8066"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/articles_new\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8066"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}