Thank you for your question – Page 115

Thank You

Thank you for your question. We will forward it to an expert in our panel. The experts opinion will be made available shortly. Please visit the main page after some time to read the answer to your question.

Some of the queries asked by people are given below.

REFUND OF ITC ON ACCOUNT OF INVERTED DUTY STRUCTURE
Excerpt of query:	IN CASE OF MINING INDUSTRIES (QUARRY BUSINESS), GST IS PAID ON RCM BASIS ON ROYALTY PAID TO GOVERNMENT FOR EXTRACTING MINERALS AT 18% AND AFTER PAYMENT ITC IS ALSO AVAILED IN GST RETURN. WHEREAS ALL SALES IS AT 5% LEADING TO ACCUMULATION OF ITC. Q1 – HOW TO CLAIM REFUND OF SUCH ACCUMULATED ITC MAINLY DUE TO RCM PAYMENT OF ROYALTY Q2 – WILL SUCH ITC AVAILED ON ROYALTY CLASSIFIED AS ITC ON INPUT SERVICE Q3 – THE SUPREME COURT HAS RECENTLY DISMISSED THE GUJARAT HC JUDGEMENT IN CASE OF VKC FOOTSTEPS INDIA – WHAT IS THE POSITION NOW. Q4 – ARE THERE ANY CHANCES THAT THE GST COUNCIL MAY AMEND THE RULE AND ALLOW GST REFUND ON ITC OF INPUT SERVICE ALSO IN CASE OF INVERTED DUTY STRUCTURE read more

REFUND OF ITC ON ACCOUNT OF INVERTED DUTY STRUCTURE

Excerpt of query:

IN CASE OF MINING INDUSTRIES (QUARRY BUSINESS), GST IS PAID ON RCM BASIS ON ROYALTY PAID TO GOVERNMENT FOR EXTRACTING MINERALS AT 18% AND AFTER PAYMENT ITC IS ALSO AVAILED IN GST RETURN. WHEREAS ALL SALES IS AT 5% LEADING TO ACCUMULATION OF ITC. Q1 – HOW TO CLAIM REFUND OF SUCH ACCUMULATED ITC MAINLY DUE TO RCM PAYMENT OF ROYALTY Q2 – WILL SUCH ITC AVAILED ON ROYALTY CLASSIFIED AS ITC ON INPUT SERVICE Q3 – THE SUPREME COURT HAS RECENTLY DISMISSED THE GUJARAT HC JUDGEMENT IN CASE OF VKC FOOTSTEPS INDIA – WHAT IS THE POSITION NOW. Q4 – ARE THERE ANY CHANCES THAT THE GST COUNCIL MAY AMEND THE RULE AND ALLOW GST REFUND ON ITC OF INPUT SERVICE ALSO IN CASE OF INVERTED DUTY STRUCTURE

COA for Urban Agri. Land or NA Land (Converted from Urban Agri. Land) as on 01-04-2001
Excerpt of query:	Ancestral Urban Agri. Land had been converted into NA Land in FY 2017-18 and ultimately sold in FY 2021-22. For the purpose of computing capital gains, while determining COA as on 01-04-2001, whose FMV is to be taken – i.e. applicable to Urban Agri. Land or NA Land? Also whether is it possible to take COA as on the date the Urban Agri. Land was converted to NA Land? Thanks. read more

COA for Urban Agri. Land or NA Land (Converted from Urban Agri. Land) as on 01-04-2001

Excerpt of query:

Ancestral Urban Agri. Land had been converted into NA Land in FY 2017-18 and ultimately sold in FY 2021-22. For the purpose of computing capital gains, while determining COA as on 01-04-2001, whose FMV is to be taken – i.e. applicable to Urban Agri. Land or NA Land? Also whether is it possible to take COA as on the date the Urban Agri. Land was converted to NA Land? Thanks.

Whether penalty u/sec. 271D can be levied on undisclosed money surrender by the assessee during search/ Survey under Income tax Act 1961.
Excerpt of query:	During the course of search/ Survey action some incriminating documents found which indicates assessee has received on money in cash in excess of Rs. 2lakh from flat purchasers. He surrender the same and paid the taxes. Whether penalty U/Sec. 271D can be levied on this on money taxed as undisclosed income. read more

Whether penalty u/sec. 271D can be levied on undisclosed money surrender by the assessee during search/ Survey under Income tax Act 1961.

Excerpt of query:

During the course of search/ Survey action some incriminating documents found which indicates assessee has received on money in cash in excess of Rs. 2lakh from flat purchasers. He surrender the same and paid the taxes. Whether penalty U/Sec. 271D can be levied on this on money taxed as undisclosed income.

CAN WE QUESTION ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF JURISDICTION
Excerpt of query:	PROVIDE ME ALL THE JUDGEMENTS THAT ARE IN THE FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO JURIDICTION read more

CAN WE QUESTION ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF JURISDICTION

Excerpt of query:

PROVIDE ME ALL THE JUDGEMENTS THAT ARE IN THE FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO JURIDICTION

GST ON SALE OF RIGHT ACCQUIRED IN LAND
Excerpt of query:	ASSESSEE EXECUTED BANAKHAT (AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE LAND) FOR TOKEN CONSIDERATION OF RS. 10 LACS. NOW ORIGINAL OWNER IS SELLING LAND TO THID PARTY AND ASSESSEE RECEIVES RS. 30 LACS AS CONSIDERATION FOR SELLING/RELINQUISHING RIGHTS IN THE LAND BY CANCELLING ORIGINAL AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE. WHETHER SUCH SUM RECEIVED FOR WITHDRAWING RIGHTS IN LAND WILL BE CHARGEABLE TO GST? IF YES, WHAT AMOUNT WILL BE TAXABLE – ONLY THE PROFIT MARGIN (RS. 20 LACS) OR ENTIRE CONSIDERATION AND AT WHAT RATE IT WILL BE TAXABLE? read more

GST ON SALE OF RIGHT ACCQUIRED IN LAND

Excerpt of query:

ASSESSEE EXECUTED BANAKHAT (AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE LAND) FOR TOKEN CONSIDERATION OF RS. 10 LACS. NOW ORIGINAL OWNER IS SELLING LAND TO THID PARTY AND ASSESSEE RECEIVES RS. 30 LACS AS CONSIDERATION FOR SELLING/RELINQUISHING RIGHTS IN THE LAND BY CANCELLING ORIGINAL AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE. WHETHER SUCH SUM RECEIVED FOR WITHDRAWING RIGHTS IN LAND WILL BE CHARGEABLE TO GST? IF YES, WHAT AMOUNT WILL BE TAXABLE – ONLY THE PROFIT MARGIN (RS. 20 LACS) OR ENTIRE CONSIDERATION AND AT WHAT RATE IT WILL BE TAXABLE?

GST REVOCATION OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION
Excerpt of query:	ASSEESSEE GST REGISTRATION CANCELLED VIDE CANCELLATION ORDER DATED 30/12/2019 U/S 29(2C) OF THE CGST ACT. ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPLIED FOR REVOCATION OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION OR NOT FILED ANY APPEAL TILL DATE. RECENTLY ISSUED GST NOTIFICATION 34/2021 DATED 29/08/2021 EXTENDED TIME LIMIT FOR FILING REVOCATION TILL 30/09/2021 ONLY IN CASE WHERE DUE DATE FOR FILING REVOCATION OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION FALLS BETWEEN 01/03/2020 TO 31/02/2021. IN OUR CASE, THE DUE DATE TO FILE REVOCATION APPLICATION DOES NOT FALL IN GIVEN PERIOD. HENCE BENEFIT OF ABOVE NOTIFICATION NOT AVAILABLE TO ASSESSEE. ALSO TIME LIMIT TO FILE APPEAL HAS EXPIRED. IN GIVEN SITUATION WHAT OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE TO ASSESSEE TO ACTIVATE HIS GST REGISTRATION? read more

GST REVOCATION OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION

Excerpt of query:

ASSEESSEE GST REGISTRATION CANCELLED VIDE CANCELLATION ORDER DATED 30/12/2019 U/S 29(2C) OF THE CGST ACT. ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPLIED FOR REVOCATION OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION OR NOT FILED ANY APPEAL TILL DATE. RECENTLY ISSUED GST NOTIFICATION 34/2021 DATED 29/08/2021 EXTENDED TIME LIMIT FOR FILING REVOCATION TILL 30/09/2021 ONLY IN CASE WHERE DUE DATE FOR FILING REVOCATION OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION FALLS BETWEEN 01/03/2020 TO 31/02/2021. IN OUR CASE, THE DUE DATE TO FILE REVOCATION APPLICATION DOES NOT FALL IN GIVEN PERIOD. HENCE BENEFIT OF ABOVE NOTIFICATION NOT AVAILABLE TO ASSESSEE. ALSO TIME LIMIT TO FILE APPEAL HAS EXPIRED. IN GIVEN SITUATION WHAT OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE TO ASSESSEE TO ACTIVATE HIS GST REGISTRATION?

Limitation to complete assessment u/s 143(3) – A.Y.2019-20
Excerpt of query:	Search & Sezure action u/s 132 was conducted on 19.06.2018. Assessments for the A.Y. 2013-14 to 2018-19 were completed u/s 153A on 14.08.20121. Assessment for the Assessment Year 2019-20 was completed u/s 143(3). The Government has extended date from time to time to complete the assessment u/s 143(3). In the light of extended period what is last date to complete the assessment u/s 143(3) for AO for the Year 2019-20. Kinly inform about latest circular on the subject. It is also requested to please inform whether prior approval to select the case for scrutiny (part priod is searched period) is necessary. read more

Limitation to complete assessment u/s 143(3) – A.Y.2019-20

Excerpt of query:

Search & Sezure action u/s 132 was conducted on 19.06.2018. Assessments for the A.Y. 2013-14 to 2018-19 were completed u/s 153A on 14.08.20121. Assessment for the Assessment Year 2019-20 was completed u/s 143(3). The Government has extended date from time to time to complete the assessment u/s 143(3). In the light of extended period what is last date to complete the assessment u/s 143(3) for AO for the Year 2019-20. Kinly inform about latest circular on the subject. It is also requested to please inform whether prior approval to select the case for scrutiny (part priod is searched period) is necessary.

reassesment u/s 147 when CIT exercises revisonal powers
Excerpt of query:	Sir, In one case, the CIT u/s 263 has set aside an assesssment u/s143(3) for a particular issue to be verfied by the assessing officer. However for the same assessment year, the assessing officer has re opened u/s 147 on another issue. Whether two proceedings is possible for same assesment year. How to proceed to re opening notice, pl advice read more

reassesment u/s 147 when CIT exercises revisonal powers

Excerpt of query:

Sir, In one case, the CIT u/s 263 has set aside an assesssment u/s143(3) for a particular issue to be verfied by the assessing officer. However for the same assessment year, the assessing officer has re opened u/s 147 on another issue. Whether two proceedings is possible for same assesment year. How to proceed to re opening notice, pl advice

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)
Excerpt of query:	1.Assessment was completed u/s 143(3)/147 making additions on account of discrepancies found in survey on account of Cash in hand and Stock in trade etc. 2.On appeal the additions made by A.O. were confirmed by CIT(A) vide order dated 06/02/2020 and ITAT order dated 08/07/2016. 3.Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.4,60,000 was levied vide order dated 26/04/2017. 4.On appeal CIT(A) deleted the Penalty on the sole ground taken regarding limitation stating that – “order of the ITAT was passed on 08/07/2016 , therefore the penalty order must have been passed by the A.O. upto 31/03/2017. However the A.O. has passed the order on 26/04/2017 which is beyond the prescribed time limit as mentioned in section 275(1)(a) of the I.T. Act. 5.Against the order of the CIT(A) department has filed appeal on two grounds : (i) Order of the CIT(A) was received in the office of the principal CIT on 07/10/2016 and therefore penalty order dated. 26/04/2017 is within time. (ii) The case of the assessee is covered under exceptions as per para- 10(a) of the circular no.03/2018 dated 1107/2018 f CBDT and further amendments thereto on 20/08/2018. Query : 1.How far ground no. 1 & 2 of the department is justified? 2.Whether penalty is covered in CBDT circular of low tax effect? If yes , any case law of CBDT circular in support of the same. 3.The assessee has not filed cross objection in ITAT whether now the assessee can challenge the penalty notice on the ground that – ‘ Have concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income’ In the penalty notice it has not been specified whether the charge is on one ground or the other. Your valuable detailed reply will be highly appreciated. Thanks & Regards read more

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)

Excerpt of query:

1.Assessment was completed u/s 143(3)/147 making additions on account of discrepancies found in survey on account of Cash in hand and Stock in trade etc. 2.On appeal the additions made by A.O. were confirmed by CIT(A) vide order dated 06/02/2020 and ITAT order dated 08/07/2016. 3.Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.4,60,000 was levied vide order dated 26/04/2017. 4.On appeal CIT(A) deleted the Penalty on the sole ground taken regarding limitation stating that – “order of the ITAT was passed on 08/07/2016 , therefore the penalty order must have been passed by the A.O. upto 31/03/2017. However the A.O. has passed the order on 26/04/2017 which is beyond the prescribed time limit as mentioned in section 275(1)(a) of the I.T. Act. 5.Against the order of the CIT(A) department has filed appeal on two grounds : (i) Order of the CIT(A) was received in the office of the principal CIT on 07/10/2016 and therefore penalty order dated. 26/04/2017 is within time. (ii) The case of the assessee is covered under exceptions as per para- 10(a) of the circular no.03/2018 dated 1107/2018 f CBDT and further amendments thereto on 20/08/2018. Query : 1.How far ground no. 1 & 2 of the department is justified? 2.Whether penalty is covered in CBDT circular of low tax effect? If yes , any case law of CBDT circular in support of the same. 3.The assessee has not filed cross objection in ITAT whether now the assessee can challenge the penalty notice on the ground that – ‘ Have concealed the particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income’ In the penalty notice it has not been specified whether the charge is on one ground or the other. Your valuable detailed reply will be highly appreciated. Thanks & Regards

CIRCULAR OF CBDT ON LOW TAX EFFECT AND EXCEPTIONS. APPLICABILITY ON PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF RS.600000
Excerpt of query:	Additions were made in the Assessment order on account of discrepancies found in stock in trade ,cash in hand etc. The same was confirmed by CIT(A) and also by ITAT Penalty u/s 271(1)(C) of Rs.600000 was levied by A.O. The same was deleted by CIT(A) on the legal ground that the penalty was passed after 6 months from the date of ITAT order. The department has filed appeal against the order of CIT (A) deleting the aforesaid penalty on 2 grounds: 1.The order of ITAT was received in the office of CIT after 3 months from the date of ITAT order and penalty order was passed within 6 months from the date of receipt in CIT office and therefore levy of penalty is not justified. 2. The case of assessee is covered under exceptions as per para 10(a) of the circular No.03/2018 dated 11/07/2018 of CBDT and further amendments thereto on 20/08/2018. read more

CIRCULAR OF CBDT ON LOW TAX EFFECT AND EXCEPTIONS. APPLICABILITY ON PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF RS.600000

Excerpt of query:

Additions were made in the Assessment order on account of discrepancies found in stock in trade ,cash in hand etc. The same was confirmed by CIT(A) and also by ITAT Penalty u/s 271(1)(C) of Rs.600000 was levied by A.O. The same was deleted by CIT(A) on the legal ground that the penalty was passed after 6 months from the date of ITAT order. The department has filed appeal against the order of CIT (A) deleting the aforesaid penalty on 2 grounds: 1.The order of ITAT was received in the office of CIT after 3 months from the date of ITAT order and penalty order was passed within 6 months from the date of receipt in CIT office and therefore levy of penalty is not justified. 2. The case of assessee is covered under exceptions as per para 10(a) of the circular No.03/2018 dated 11/07/2018 of CBDT and further amendments thereto on 20/08/2018.

Latest Judgements

Latest Articles

Categories

Recent Posts

Meta