Messages

I have already read it.

With due respect, the logic does seem strange that you directly go for Rule 8D rather than first compel the AO to express dissatisfaction with the claims of the Assessee.

I would disagree that the matter has been laid to rest by Cheminvest by the Delhi ITAT.

Further,with due respect, Cheminvest also has one more strange logic. It says that the Rule 8D is to be applied automatically in case of tax free income. One need not go into the nature of different expenses.
This is actually contradictory to the language used in section 14A (2).


 

Sec 10(38) only says that the income should arise after the sp date.
Income arises on transfer and not on acquisition.
So the date of acquisition is immaterial.

MAT has to be levied,if at all, on assets then it should be on Net Assets and not on Gross assets.

The thing is that exceptions shud be made in  case of power companies and other infra companies which have long gestation periods. Just for the sake of Simplicity you can't forego rationality.

Also NBFCs should be put at par with banks for MAT rate.

As far as I know, there has been no reference to any larger bench.


CA. Bhavesh Savla.

No need to convert it into physical.
Your broker can do an off-market transaction through your DEMAT account only.


Bhavesh
Keep SMiling

Does anyone have any knowledge if there has been any writ petition against Rule 8D in any High Court?
Also please tell if any hearing is already over or at when is the hearing expected.


Bhavesh
Keep Smiling

Exactly.
Rule 8D has completely gone ahead of its object.
This is not surprising because in Mr. Chidambaram's tenure most of the tax laws have gone beyond their object.

How do u justify .5 % of the Avg. Investments.
Suppose I dont have any Opening Investments. I purchase on April 10 and sell off in Feb 15. I earn a huge dividend income during that period, then the above clause will not apply.
But if I dont sell off during the Current year and sell it off in April Next F.Y. then the clause will be applicable even if I dont earn a single extra paisa of Dividend income.

Bhavesh
Keep smiling 

Also it is a fact that Rule 8D is highly arbitrary and leads to absurd results.

There is a news item in the Statesmen which said that the Satyam Auditors have admitted to the fraud.
I have not been able to independently confirm this.
Can anyone please verify it from other sources.

This is a bad news indeed for the CA Brand. The faith that the society has for CAs will go sown.


Bhavesh Savla
Keep Smiling. (inspite of the above)

Please name the case law.
Which ITAT?



Bhavesh Savla
Keep Smiling.

But you can't possibly penalise a person maintaining proper books of accounts and reflecting 8% in his profit and Loss Account whereas a person not maintaining books of accounts will pay only 5% of the Turonver.
It is common sense that the net profit can never be exaclty 5% of the Turnover. If his actual profit is less than 5%, then he wont take the benefit of Section 44AF. Also if the net profit is more than 5%, then he won't be able to take the benefit. Then the question is for whom is the Section meant?

Therefore I feel that even if the P and L a/c shows a net profit of more than 5%, the assessee is entitled to only take 5% of the Turnover as income.

Please write in your disagreements, your views. I have not been to find a case law on this subject.

Bhavesh Savla
Keep Smiling.



   

I think the Supplementary Board Circular by CBDT itself said that a person can be both a Trader and an investor.
The thing is that was there an assessment in the earlier years?
If the position of the assessee was accepted by the Officer in the earlier years, then the A.O. cant change his position.
You can see Janak Rangawala MUMbai ITAT.
Also there was an earlier discussion in this regard.


Bhavesh Savla
.Keep Smiling. 
   

That will lead to an imbalance in the accounts.
Suppose the assessee has invested the profits in Bank FDs. Then how wiil the Bank FDs be shown in the Balance-Sheet.


Bhavesh Savla
Keep Smiling.

The assessee is engaged in retail trade.
He has prepared Financials. The P and L A/C is showing Profit of Rs. 2,40,000 i.e. 12% of Turnover.
Can he still take the benefit of Section 44 AF and offer only 5 % of the amount for taxation or will he have to offer 12% as shown in the P and L A/C

Bhavesh Savla
Keep Smiling.