A Individual recived a Immovable property namely flat by Registred Gift deed in July 2021. The stamp duty value of the flat is Rs 80 lakhs. At the time of filing Income tax return for the Assessment year 2022-23 the consultant pointed out that since this is not a gift from relative , the amout of Rs 80 Lakhs will be taxable under section 56(2)(10). Now the said Individual has entered into cancellation deed and has cancelled the said gift from its inception. Please confirm if there would be any liability now on account of Section 56(2)(10)    

read more

Assessee is partnership engaged in the business of constructions. Assessee is owner of land, which is acquired under Compensation under Right to fair, compensation and transparency in Land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement Act 2013. Assessee firm has Received compensation under this act amounting to Rs 100 Crores. Whether this amount is taxable under Income Tax in the hands of Firm. Pl guide.  

read more

Can CIT denied the registration U/Sec. 12AA of Income Tax on the ground that the Trust has not started it’s activities. The objects of the trust are charitable.  

read more

What is stamp duty on purchase of agriculture land

read more

Assessee “A” is an Individual engaged in the business of construction. Assessee is owner of land which is held as stock in trade having potential of 120000 sq. Ft saleable aera. He was in search of person who is having knowledge of development of big project and also have infrastructure as well as funds say “B” Both the parties “A and B” enter in to partnership to develop the said project in the year 2017. A is going to introduced the land in the firm and B is going to invest funds as well as his infrastructure for development as well as obtaining  sanction and liasoning with Govt authorities. A separate POA will be given in the name of person belonging to B for doing all liasoning work. Both the parties have agreed that Party B will be given 20% of sales of the project as his profit and the balance profit will be distributed between A And B in the ratio of 98%: 2%. Deed also provide for clause of retirement and in such situation, it will be done on the Fair market price of the project. Party B has obtained all the sanctions which are require for the project and also started the construction of the project and did the investment of almost 4 crs. However the party A is not happy with the speed of construction implemented by B and due witch they can not sale any unit of the project. Therefore they decided to separate and as per plan party A is going to introduced Party C as new partner and Party B is  retire from the firm in the year 2018-19. Since the project has not developed, both the parties have agreed that Party B will be given the capital introduced by B of Rs 4 CR  and further exist cost of 5 crore for obtaining all sanctions and approval of the project and doing initial construction of the project and for canceling the POA given. Partnership firm claimed the the exist amount of Rs. 5 crore as revenue expenditure on the ground that party B has obtained all sanctions and approval, for cancelling POA and for taking smooth control of the project and therefore it is cost given for rights for property and therefore included in the Work in progress. In the Assessment For A. Y. 2019-20 has held that the exist cost given to retiring partner is capital receipt and not revenue expenditure and accordingly reduced the amount of WIP. Assessee filed an appeal and in an appeal also raised ground that if it is capital receipt then it should be allowed to be amortised as and when sales happened proportionately. CIT A has decided the appeal holding that it is revenue expenditure and included the same in WIp, however rejected the alternate claim of the assessee about amortisation of the same in the year of sales of units proportionately. Department has filed an appeal against the said order before ITAT. Issue: 1. Is appeal is maintainable as there is no tax liability in the year under an appeal. 2. Whether assessee is stand of claiming the same as revenue expenditure is correct? 3. Whether assessee should file the Co for alternate ground about amortisation? Pl guide.

read more

An individual assessee filed his return of income for AY 2020-21;an immovable property in the nature of   vacant low lying agril land in a panchayat area, was purchased by the assessee at a consideration of Rs.42.00 lakhs in the FY 2019-20;the stamp duty valuation was Rs.1.37 crores. The case was selected in CASS “Limited Category”, with notice being issued u/s 143(2).The assessee participated in the assessment proceedings, offering his explanation regarding the anomaly. The assessing officer issued SCN invoking section 56(2)(x) in the hands of the assessee who  vehemently objected to the triggering of  the deeming provisions of section 56(2)(x) and preferred a reference to the DVO who was being referred to for proper ascertainment .Pending the report of the DVO, assessment was completed u/s 143(3) rws 144B taxing the entire difference amount u/s 56(2)(x) citing the time barring provisions .The DVO sent his technical  staff to the spot and thereafter determined the value  at 1.48 crores on ideal surmises and conjectures  citing comparisons based on stamp duty valuation of the comparable  and sent the valuation report to the assessee to raise  objections if any  giving a meagre less than a weeks  time to respond to and contending therein the report that he(DVO) himself was present which was never the case as the assessee was himself present at the date and time of spot inspection by the technical staff deployed by the DVO . Sir/Madam it is very pertinent to take note of the fact that assessee had not obtained an independent valuer’s report on his own, completely relying under a firm sense of belief that a proper valuation will be made by the DVO.Meanwhile the assessee will be preferring an appeal u/s 246A of the Act, the time period of which has not yet expired . Sir/Madam my question [A] Can the DVO’s  arbitrary report be put to challenge? if yes before which forum, though an objection will be invariably sent to the DVO formally. Can the said facts of the arbitrary action of the DVO be incorporated in the memorandum of appeal in Form 35? Sir/Madam, are there any clear cut Court/Tribunal verdicts  in this regard in regard to challenge of the DVO’s report?[section 55A read with section 56(2)(x)] An answer is solicited in right earnest at the earliest. Regards & thanks ADV SUBRATA RAY

read more

Capital gains from a sale are deposited in capital gain’s account scheme and two years have passed from transaction date. Can I purchase an existing old home and renovate within 3 years, still claim 54f exemption? Will this be considered as construction of new residential house which gives 3 year time for this?

read more

Form: 5 has been issued under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme settling demand arising from order u/s. 144 rws 147 for AY 2012-13. After that AO has issued notice u/s. 154 for change in tax demand arising from order u/s. 144 rws 147 for AY 2012-13. Whether AO can change demand when he has ascertained demand while accepting declaration under VsVs. ? Whether change in demand will affect already issued Form: 5?  What the remedies to the assessee for remaining demand?

read more

In case of assessee who is engaged in construction activity, has incurred certain expenditure which he has claimed as revenue expenditure and included in the work in progress,as there was no sale. During the course of assemment proceedings AO completed the assessment by considering it as capital expenditure and he reduced the amount of such expenditure from the Work in progress. Assessee prepfered an appeal before CIT A on following ground : a. It is revenue expenditure only and claimed is correct and WIP is also correct. b. If it is not reevune expenditure, then allow it to be appropriated proportiinately in the year when sale will disclosed. CIT A has appreciated the submissions of the Appellant and accepted the main  contention of the  assessee that it revune expenditure only an allowed an appeal by again accepting the amount of WIP disclosed by the assessee. And rejected the second ground raised by the assessee. Department has filed an appeal before the tribunal against the order of CIT A. Can assessee raised contention that the addition made is revune neutral and therefore not maintainable. Pl guide.  

read more

Fact of Case: A foreign company (Germany) sold shares of an Indian company held by it to another foreign company (Germany). Applicable Provisions: As per para 4 of Article 13 of DTAA between India & Germany “Gains from alienation of shares in a company which is a resident of the contracting state may be taxed in that state”. Section 9(1)(i) considers the income to accrue or arise in India if all income accruing or arising, whether directly or indirectly, through or from any business connection in India… or through the transfer of a capital asset situated in India.  All other conditions mentioned in Section 47 are also met. From the above-mentioned provisions we can conclude that the buying company is mandatory to deduct TDS while making the payment to the selling company. Questions: Q 1: How company a foreign company will deposit the deducted TDS in India? Q 2: Does deductor of TDS (foreign company) is mandatory to have TAN & PAN to deposit TDS in India? Q 3: Do both the foreign companies are mandatory to file ITR in India for the relevant FY? Q 4: Applicable TDS rate will be 20% + Cess & Surcharge since no rate specifically given for TDS anywhere in the Act or Tax Treaty between two countries? Q 5: Do deductee also required to apply for PAN in India?   Thanks in advance for the reply

read more