| Question And Answer | |
|---|---|
| Subject: | NEW SURCHARGE SCHEME (contd.) |
| Category: | Income-Tax |
| Querist: | vswaminathan |
| Answered by: | Research Team |
| Tags: | Surcharge |
| Date: | August 27, 2023 |
Apropos /In continuation of earlier posted comments :
Pending any FEEDback, no guess why so, invite attention to the supplement @
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/new-surcharge-scheme-swaminathan-venkataraman/?trackingId=qR9y6OmmTKG1rFalXlUUFg%3D%3D
To reiterate / repeat : The subject matter, as urged , deserves a joint representation to the FM/CBDT as a matter of prudence , based on common sense. Proactive steps need to be taken and pursued , relentlessly ,- both jointly and severally, to the end of a favourble outcome aspired for; in preference to postponing such action until after the CPC has started issuing ‘INTIMATIONS’ in the normal course /as a routine.
For, among others, one good and very valid reason why that is imperative is that , apart from courts, the ITAT itself is groaning under the weight of escalating pendency of cases.
courtesy
Joint representation is needed. It may be desirable to take up the issue the Bombay Chartered Accountant’s Society or the Chamber of Tax consultants Mumbai.
The ANSWER of the ‘research team’is too belated to be taken in; more over, has gone beyond that stage of purposefully making a representation so as to expect any favourable outcome. The simple reason is that the CPC has,as already brought to notice,gone ahead with processing tax returns and sending INTIMATIONS in a routine manner.
Further the desirability of approaching the suggested two practising CAs’ bodies for the purpose on hand is suspect !? For that matter,attempts personally made with an impersonal aim, through communication# to the apex regulatory body-the ICAI itself do not seem to have had so far any fruitful outcome- open to correction if factually wrong !
# e’mails sent and Posts on Linkedin shared.
PS: Why,even after trying/pressing hard to impress upon the ADMN. of itatonline for itself taking the intiative , for indicated /stated valid reasons,has not taken it any seriously,-is not at all understood, rather icomprehensible !?
For ATTN: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/surcharge-facinating-story-changes-last-decade-venkataraman/?trackingId=CncghY1QTQ%2BZTWdNxgUEiQ%3D%3D
< within, – @https://www.facebook.com/swaminathanv3/posts/pfbid04TPmjwf2pLGFQ9FTqPDZUUEaHnq58aUGruG3jbdzWgGaoWhT4NWQZjSwiJeFYmzxl
IN so far as the concerns/grievances are of/ relate to middle and low income groups,eigible for the basic exemption from levy of surchage, it might be,in the intersts of the REVENUE itself,to thoroughly look through the assessment records for the past years and take steps suo motu,to the end of, in all fairness, granting refunds of excess surcharge auto calculated and collected !
courtesy
An UPDATE (To Supplement)
https://www.facebook.com/swaminathanv3/posts/pfbid02WRkkajFcAHvkYZhWBSvXdhiSmfVWWEXU79x8vDJcBNydJwLRy1iKSc8uqRmL6yxnl
YET another UPDATE >https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7120970776417107968?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
TEXT of its contents already shared with the ADMN.
Close on the heels of the last of the comments:
https://taxguru.in/income-tax/taxable-salary-income-old-vs-new-regime-section-115bac.html?
A fresh ALERT/INVITE To One nd All concerned:
For GOODNESS sake, once again, strongly suggest/appeal/recommend to go through minutely/diligently, for identifying the changes seem to have been made in slabs for surcharge and rate(s)-but PROSPECTIVELY ?!
Tried to locate but unsuccessfully Notification, if any, since issued for effecting such changes!?
Any thoughts /reaction/ information to spare and share!
courtesy
^ Source (ITD Portal)>
https://incometaxindia.gov.in/tutorials/78.calculation-of-taxable-salary-income.pdf
As read through and personally understood, the REVENUE has now, obviously being quite convinced over the points of contention raised, effected certain material changes in levy of surcharge, in taxpayers’ favor.
To be precise, for calculation of surcharge, –
1. a sum of Rs. 50 lakh included in the first slab of income up to Rs one crore should be excluded. Accordingly, surcharge on income-tax should be levied only so much of income-tax payable on the so reduced balance of
Rs. 50 lakh.
2. Rate of surcharge prescribed should be applied on a slab wise basis. That is, -for income range covered in a particular slab, only surcharge for that slab should be applied. So much so, in a case in which chargeable (total income) works out to say, Rs 1,50,00,000, surcharge should be calculated as under:
@ 10 % on Rs.1,00,00,000
AND
@ 15% on the balance of Rs.50,00,000
2. For any income included in the chargeable income on which income-tax is payable at a special rate, – e.g., ‘capital gains’, rate of surcharge now separately prescribed should be applied.
To sum up:
As a result, and consequent upon the so effected changes, – among the several points of objection raised, seeking corrections, – at least the primary objection against surcharge auto calculated and collected, in excess, by the SYSTEM (CPC), on the ground of it being arbitrary and confiscatory has to be regarded to have been set at rest/ resolved!
OVER to expert professionals in field practice, with an invite to spare and share independent but eminently well-founded contrarian viewpoints/ opinion, if any!
courtesy
“so much so, in a case in which chargeable (total income) works out to say, Rs 1,50,00,000, surcharge should be calculated as under:
@ 10 % on Rs.1,00,00,000
AND
@ 15% on the balance of Rs.50,00,000”
– wrong per your argument, it should be @ 10% for income from 50,00,001 to 1 cr and @ 15% on the balance of Rs.50,00,000 (1 cr to 1.5 cr).
In accordance with the Item 1.,of course, undoubtedly , no Surcharge on income-tax on a sum of Rs.50,00,000 included in the first slab for income range from Rs.01 to Rs.100,00,000 ia payable . As such, surcharge should be calculated @10% on the reduced balance of Rs. 50,00,000 ONLY !
The observations under Item 2. it is humbly prayed to be read as corrected suitably.
Nothing more TO ADD/ Reply !
“surcharge auto calculated and collected, in excess, by the SYSTEM (CPC), on the ground of it being arbitrary and confiscatory has to be regarded to have been set at rest/ resolved!”
– I don’t think so.
– how do you come to this conclusion?
– There is a clear calculation statement – Health and Education Cess at the rate of 4% is applicable on the *amount of Income tax plus surcharge.*
– However, there is no such CLEAR / EXPLICIT definition/calculation rule on the surcharge
– on what amount it is calculated?
– On the slabwise income at the slabwise rate OR on the *amount of TOTAL Income tax*?
– IMO the way ITD has defined surcharge calculation, it is on the amount of TOTAL Income tax, same as current AY.No change.
The GUIDANCE note issued by the REVENUE is, in my firm opinion,both in letter and spirit,more than so amply clear, as mandating to be compulsory followed by the administering authorities.Anyone having any doubts whatsoever, for personal reasons of any kind, should seek clarification directly from the concerned authorities explaining the reasons for own doubts.
As regards the SYSTEM/CPC, for the corrective changes,if and when made,- if not already effected,could,- no need to add,- be ascertained/be known only from practical handon experience.
“ITR statistics AY 2023-24”
https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1944821#:~:text=Out%20of%20the%206.77%20crore,to%207%20(6.40%20lakh).
Out of the 6.77 crore ITRs filed for AY 2023-24, 49.18% of ITRs are ITR-1 (3.33 crore), 11.97% are ITR-2 (81.12 lakh), 11.13% are ITR-3 (75.40 lakh), 26.77% are ITR-4 (1.81 crore) and 0.94% are ITR-5 to 7 (6.40 lakh).
https://www.cnbctv18.com/personal-finance/itr-filing-trends-data-how-many-paid-zero-income-tax-crorepati-income-form-returns-17449181.htm
Of the total 6.77 crore individual income tax return (ITR) filers for the financial year 2022-23, 4.65 crore people reportedly paid zero tax, means 2.12 cr people paid ITax. This means a whopping 69% of the people who filed ITR till July 31, 2023 (the deadline for filing ITR for FY22-23 without penalty) were either not eligible to pay tax or paid no tax.
Also, reports and several chartered accountants (CAs) on Twitter said that 1.69 lakhs (ie a meager 0.25% who filed ITR) people disclosed annual income of over Rs 1 crore from their profession.
Of the population of 130 cr JUST 2.12 cr people ( ie 1.63%) paid ITax, what an irony? Perhaps the rest are poor farmers?
WRT my comment (@https://itatonline.org/digest/qa/new-surcharge-scheme-contd/#comment-1276) the guideline since issued by the REVENUE, to my mind in all fairness, in any INTIMATION sent to assessees , particularly for AY 2023-24 , the necessary corrections ought to have been made suo motu, in accordance with the said guidelines. Had that been done, assessees would not have to suffer, the otherwise easily avoidable hardship /hassle of approaching CPC for any rectification and refund of excess surcharge, legally and legitimaely due.
Any information about cases in which that has already been done might be helpful.
CAs and OTHER TAX PROFESSIONALS , with reasonably good exposure and expertise in field practice and more importantly, those who are expected to have insightful knowledge of ‘the law’, will, in deference to the open invite earlier extended, do well to rise to the occassion at least now, share any available factual information on this aspect, for THE COMMON GOOD-of not only taxpayers but also the REVENUE!
For,after all, by any sane unbiassed thinking, there can be no iota of doubt in any such matter,that the cost of litigation by the REVENUE will eventually be to the account of genuine taxpayers, and require to be charged and borne by their significant contributons to THE EXCHEQUER !?
courtesy
PS: Need to be noted that,the Posted article by an eminent law expert , so also the comments supplied thereunder, on a closely related Topic, LINK –
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/vswaminathan13_activity-7121765295945388033–LVg?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop ,
is of every relevance and make ‘sense’ < !!?
ADD: Now that the due date(s) for payment of the remaining instalments of advance tax is round the corner/not far off, assessees covered by the Revenue’s GUIDANCE Note may have to prudently considertaking advantage of the reduced incidence of surcharge; thereby ensure/avoid overpayment!
Similar consideration arises and action is called for, for ensuring that TDS/TCS is not overpaid! of course, that has to be done in co-ordination with the persons obligated to comply with the said requirements!!
LooK up the latest Post / comment of relevance @ https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:groupPost:13927028-7126241545472659456?