There is one partnership Firm WITH 2 PARTNERS. One of the partners died in the month of March 2022. Sharing ration was 50:50. They had one Shop in the books of account and were claiming depreciation on it, WDV 31.3.2021 47,360/-. Shop Acquired in the year 2001- 02 COA – INR 334470 /-. Now the firm is selling the shop for INR 12,44,000/- (fair value). The asset is not yet transferred. There will be STCG to the firm as per sec. 50  INR 11,96,640 ( 12,44,000 – 47360 ) My query is : 1. To save on the capital gains tax we need to invest in Bonds as per 54 EC, now since the firm is deemed to be dissolved on the death of the partner, how can the investment be made now. 2. What will be the date of transfer of Asset? 3. The return of income of the firm is yet to be filed, do we need to take the effect of transfer in the return of income for AY 2022-23 or can we take a following view; Where one of the two partners of the firm dies, there is dissolution of the firm. But where the surviving the partner carries on the business with all the assets and liabilities as a going concern, there is no distribution within the meaning of the guidelines  given by the Supreme Court in Sakthi Trading Co. v. CIT [2001] 250 ITR 871 (SC). Therefore there is no liability for the Capital gains tax [CIT v. Moped and Machines [2006] 281 ITR 52 (MP)]

read more

Assessee is private limited co filed the Return of Income filed the Return of Income For 20-21 where in Education cess has been claimed as expenditure on the basis of decision of hon’ble BHC. Assessee co has received SCN as to why proposed variation should not be made on 8.08.2022. on following grounds 1.Education Cess is not an allowable expenditure/deduction u/s 40(a)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2) It has retrospective effect from 01.04.2005 i.e. A.Y. 2005-06. 3) Penalty u/s 270A is imposable on such claim for under reporting of income. 4.Hence, you are requested to show sufficient cause as why the amount of Rs.4,26,095/- would not be disallowed in your case as per provision of section 40(a)(ii) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. Further, you are also requested to show sufficient cause as to why penalty proceedings u/s 270A would not be initiated for under reporting of income for the reasons discussed above. is the action of AO is correct, if yes, how the compliance be made ? whether penalty U/Sec. 270A is applicable? pl guide .

read more

Assessee firm has made declaration under IDS for A.Y.2015-16 amounting to Rs. 3.30 cr. and has paid the installment of tax due on 30.11.2016, 30.03.2017 and 30.09.2017 , however due to mistake of CA , there was shortfall of Rs. 1313000/-, which he has paid on 3.10.2017. The assessee thought he had made the compliance of IDS. since the all the mail id of CA was given , assessee was not aware of  the shortfall and proceedings completed by the AO U/Sec.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s 144B on 22.03.22 , where in AO has taxed the entire amount disclosed under IDS amounting to Rs. 3.30 cr in the A.Y. 2017-18 and raised the demand of Rs. 4.08 cr. No credit for taxes paid has been given. assessee come to know this when the demand notice came to him on his mail whether AO is correct in taxing the amount disclosed in IDS for A.Y. 2015-16 in A.Y.2017-18 Whether not giving the credit of taxes paid under IDS is justified pl guide the correct action to be taken in this regards,

read more

Background Company A is headquartered in US and has a subsidiary company B in India. Company A is primarily owned by a Private Equity firm (approx. 80% ownership) Company A (US company) has issued ESOP to employees including employees of subsidiary company in India. Stock options were issued at a price of $10 per option. FMV as per merchant banker report is $15 as on December 31, 2020 In June 2021, there is transfer of ownership to a new Private Equity company. Both are large PE firms and majority stake exceeding 70-75% has exchanged hands As per transaction price for above deal is approx. $30 Company A has not obtained any valuation report as on date after that Dec 20 As part of the ownership transfer, ESOPs issued by company A were cancelled and the employees (including Indian employees) were paid the net differential value ($30 less $10 = $20) Query Query is specifically around tax treatment in the hands of Indian employees. Company has shown this in form16 under other income. · Whether the options granted by company A under its ESOP plan (and later on rescinded by the employees) are treated as capital asset? · If answer to question 1 is affirmative, then whether the waiver of right to receive shares by the employees amount to transfer chargeable to tax under the head “ capital gains”? · If answer to question 2 is affirmative, then can the period of holding of these options for computation of capital gains be considered from the grant date of such ESOP options?

read more

Can one opt for filing new ITR U after notice under Black Money Act is already served? If income pertains to AY 16/17 but BMA notice is served in AY 21/22, what will be the year for which ITR u can be filed ?

read more

Whether employees of Autonomus body such as FTII/ NSD are treated as Govt. Employees; as CCS Rules are applicable to them.? Can leave encashment receive at the time of retirement is exmept in these cases?

read more

Assessee has agreed to sell a flat and made agreement with buyer, possession of flat is also given within time but consideration of flat is not received from buyer . Now question is they want to claim exemption by investing in 54EC Bond but the Sale consideration is  not yet received. Stipulated time of investing in 54EC is over and still consideration is not received, is any case law to prove that transfer is still not completed as consideration is not received.

read more

BCCI HAS CONTRACT WITH CRICKETOR WHEREIN FOR EVERY FOREIGN TOUR BCCI PAYS FOR EXAMPLE – 100 DOLLAR PER DAY AS ALLOWANCE FOR LOCAL EXPENSE INCURRED BY CRICKETOR IN RESPECTIVE COUNTRY. FOR 15 DAYS TOUR TO USA – BCCI PAY 1500 DOLLAR AS ALLOWANCE IRRESPECTIVE OF ACTUAL EXPENSE INCURRED. IF ACTUAL EXPENSE IS INCURRED LESS THAN THE ALLOWANCE GIVEN – THEN THE DIFFERENCE AMOUNT IS TRNAFSRRED IN SAVING BANK ACCOUNT OF CRICKETOR IN INDIA IN INR. WHETHER GST WILL BE APPLICABLE ON SUCH ALLOWANCE

read more

CELEBRITY CRICKETOR WITH AN INTENT TO TO MAINTAIN GOOD IMAGE/SOCIAL STATUS AND TO GAIN MORE FOLOWERS AND NEW BRAND ENDORSMENT PURCHASES EXPENSIVE WATCH AND CLOTHES FOR HIM. Q1. CAN SUCH PURCHASE OF CLOTHS / WATCH BE CLAIMED AS EXPENSE DEDUCTION FROM BRAND ENDORSMENT INCOME AND CRICKET INCOME. CRICKETOR TAKES SHOULDER INSURANCE KNEE INSURANCE LEG INSURANCE I.E. IMPORTANT BODY PART REQUIRED TO PLAY CRICKET  AND ALSO WITH A CLAUSE THAT IN CASE OF INJURY TO ANY SUCH PART DUE TO WHICH HE IS NOT ABLE TO PLAY MATCH INSURANCE COMPANY WILL REPAY. Q2 – CAN SUCH INSURANCE AMOUNT BE CLAIMED AS EXPENSE

read more

Assessee is a charitable trust duly registered u/s 12A of the Act. Assessment for A.Y 2015-16 was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act in October, 2017 by assessing the income in the hands of the assessee as charitable trust which is registered u/s 12A of the Act.  Registration u/s 12A was cancelled in May, 2018 on the ground that the trust had indulged in illegal activities by accepting capitation fees and therefore the trust is sham or bogus, disregarding the fact that the trust is involved in educational activities and also accepted by the department in past since its inception i.e 1992. The said registration was cancelled retrospectively from A.Y 2008-09  onwards. Notice u/s 263 was issued in the month of January, 2020, the assessee has given the reply that as on the date of passing the assessment order for A.Y 2015-16, in October 2017 the registration u/s 12A was valid and therefore, the order passed by the AO is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue, however, the PCIT has not appreciated the submissions of the assessee and passed the order u/s 263 in the month of February, 2021 by holding that the assessment order passed for A.Y 2015-16, is found to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Is the action of the PCIT is legally correct ?

read more