• Welcome to itatonline.org Forum.
 

News:

Contact details of departmental representatives is available.

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - cankgoyal

#1
Sir, whether it is for only taking advance/byana/earnest money  receipt/payment in relation to immovable property  covered u/s 269SS AND 269T, if in cash in excess of Rs 20000.       

OR   whether it  also cover Sale and purchase amount in cash in excess of Rs 20000/- not involving any advnace etc.

In my opinion it covered only advance in relation to immovable property trans, whether i am right
#2
earlier in section 133A survey only in the business premises of the assessee. Therefore, in case of Govt. offices TDS survey by the assessing officer where no business activity carried on may be void and illegal. To overcome this new section intoduced
#3
By amendment in section 133A now power is given that an income-tax authority may for the purpose of verifying that tax has been deducted or collected at source in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVII-B or Chapter XVII-BB, as the case may be( w.e.f. 01-10-2014)

whether earlier TDS survey done by the Assessing Officer (TDS) are without any authority under the Act and  thefeore illegal, null and void.
#4
Now there are many notices from AO(TDS) for non deduction of TDS for purchse of immovable property (other than agriculture land).

This is new provision applicable from 01-06-2013 but huge notices without any awareness by the income tax department to the public ,  real estate agents/brokers or Registrar office

There is real problem as this provision is applicable to every person. And every person not supposed to income tax provisions (except those filing returns, doing business). In india mostly purchases by villagers, uneducated persons , in the name of womens etc.

to avoid these notices, litigation, There should be responsibility fixed on Registrar / Teshildar before doing registy the deed, he ensure himself that TDS is deduted and paid properly, in the income tax act
#5
Discussion / Re: WHETHER SECTION 234E VALID
October 09, 2013, 08:10:29 PM
Thanks Manoj ji

but still question arise

1.There is no penal provison in the name of late fees in Income TAX Act for other type of returns or obligations then why under this chapter when the liablity of the deductor is not direct but vicriours nature.

2.Whether it is justifed to levy statutory late fees,  when TDS is deposited in time or with interest but only file delay return due to valid reasons.
Is it not very hard and it should be depend on reasonable cause theory.

3. when there is penalty provison also u/s 271H  for not filing or delay filing
#6
Discussion / Re: WHETHER SECTION 234E VALID
September 19, 2013, 04:24:28 PM
right there is penalty for late filing of return

but my question  is that for one defualt ( Late filing of TDS Return) can there be penalty imposed together in different section of the act, is it constitutional
1. section 234E Rs 200/- per day
2. Section 271H Rs 10000/- to rs. 100000/-

3 sec 271A(2)(k) Rs. 100- 200 per day
#7
Discussion / Re: WHETHER SECTION 234E VALID
September 18, 2013, 02:32:53 PM
EVEN, There are other provisions under income tax act, which require filing of statement/returns but there is no such late fees concept.

i.e. Income tax returns u/s 139
      Annual Information Return
      Wealth Tax Return
      Statement of declaration of form 60/61
#8
Discussion / WHETHER SECTION 234E VALID
September 13, 2013, 11:19:34 AM
Whether Late Fees for delay in furnishing of TDS Statement u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is constitutionally valid.


Where there is already much penal provision on same issue like:

1.   Penalty u/s 271A(2)(k) for failure to file quarterly statement within the specified time. Rs 100 for every day of default.

2.   Penalty u/s 271H for not furnishing TDS Statement from Rs. 10000/- to Rs. 100000/-

3.   Penalty u/s 271C for failure to deduct the TDS, a sum equal to amount of tax failed to deduct.

4.   Penalty u/s 221 for not deducting the whole or part of the tax or after not collecting fails to deposit.

5.   Rigorous imprisonment u/s 276B for failure to pay the tax upto 7 years.



There are two penal provision already exist for failure to file tds statement and now one more levied in the name of late fees for not filing tds returns, whether it is constitutionally valid ?

For One and same crime (not filing of tds returns) can department penalize many fold to the assessee.   

There is no term of LATE FEES in whole Income Tax Act except this newly section insert.