Messages

In a non-DTA country, 115A is the section whose rates will be applicable. So he is to be taxed as per 115A. S 195, as such, does not specify rates. The rates have to be decided based on taxability.

SECTION 195 IS ONLY CHARGING SECTION.IT DOES NOT PRESCRIBES THE RATES.GIVE ME SOME TIME,I  WILL REPLY IN DETAIL.

go for 115A or you can also file application u/s 195(2) with ACIT/ITO international taxation for more clarity.

My question was " whether this amendment will include carbon credits also ?

WHETHER THIS AMENDMENT INCLUDES CARBON CREDIT FOR PURPOSE OF INCOME ?
Following sub-clause (xviii) shall be inserted after sub-clause (xvii) of clause (24) of section 2 by the Finance Act, 2015, w.e.f. 1-4-2016 :
(xviii)       assistance in the form of a subsidy or grant or cash incentive or duty drawback or waiver or concession or reimbursement (by whatever name called) by the Central Government or a State Government or any authority or body or agency in cash or kind to the assessee other than the subsidy or grant or reimbursement which is taken into account for determination of the actual cost of the asset in accordance with the provisions of Explanation 10 to clause (1) of section 43;

One must see into the intention of the section. In present scenario,it is almost difficult for anyone to get his own house constructed, you have to depend on the builder. Once you make payment to builder for purchase of house, one must get deduction unless and until it is done with a motive of fraud.

Honourable ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of ITO Vs Shri Akhter Nooruddinahmed Saiyed in ITA No. 837/Ahd/2013 has held that assessment made on a dead person would be a nullity in law. For the perusal of your honour, we are reproducing herewith observation of the bench,
"It may be recalled that in the case of Ellis C. Reid v. CIT 5 ITC 100 the Bombay High Court had held that where a person died after the commencement of the assessment year but before his income of the previous year was assessed, his executor was not liable to pay the tax and that if the death occurred while assessment proceedings were pending, the proceedings could not be continued and the assessment could not be made after the person's death: This view of the Bombay High Court led the Legislature to introduce Section 24B in the1922 Act in 1933. Section 24B corresponds to Section 159 of the present Act. The relevant part of Section 159 reads as under:-
159. (1) Where a person dies, his legal representative shall be liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased.
(2)   For the purpose of making an assessment (including an assessment, reassessment or recomputation under Section 147) of the income of the deceased and for the purpose of levying any sum in the hands of the legal representative in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (1)- (a) Any proceeding taken against the deceased before his death shall be deemed to have been taken against the legal representative and may be continued against the legal representative from the stage at
which it stood on the date of the death of deceased;
(b) Any proceeding which could have been taken against the deceased if he had survived, may be taken against the legal representative; and
(c) All the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly.
(3) The legal representative of the deceased shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be an assessee.
A study of Sub-section (1) of Section 159 clearly shows that it is by a legal fiction created in the provision that the legal representative of a deceased person had been made liable to pay any sum which the deceased would have been liable to pay if he had not died, in the like manner and to the same extent as the deceased. The legal representative of the deceased, as has been laid down in Sub-section (3) of Section 159 are, by such legal fiction, deemed to be the assessees. Sub-section (2) of Section 159 lays down the conditions of applicability of the provisions of Section 159. Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) says that any proceedings taken against the deceased before his death shall be deemed to have been taken against the legal representative and may be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which it stood on the date of the death of the deceased. For the applicability of this clause the proceedings for making an assessment or for the purpose of levying any sum should have been taken against the deceased in his lifetime and these would be such proceedings which may be continued against the legal representative from the stage at which such proceedings stood on the date of the death of the deceased. Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) says that any proceedings which could have been taken against the deceased if he had survived may be taken against the legal representative. This clause obviously deals with the situation where the proceedings are contemplated to be taken against the estate of the deceased after his death. Since the legal representative of the deceased represents his estate such proceedings may be taken against them. The study of these provisions clearly brings us to hold that only those proceedings for making assessment or levying any sum may be taken against the deceased, so that they may be continued after his death, which have been taken in his lifetime. In his lifetime such proceedings would necessarily be taken against and in the name of the deceased. However, if the deceased had died before any such proceedings could have been taken against him, the proceedings may be taken against the legal representative of the deceased under the provisions of Sub-clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 159. It is clearly inferred that assessment under the Act can only be made against an individual assessee who must be a living person.
In the case of CIT v. Amarchand N. Shroff [1963] 48 ITR 59 the Supreme Court held that the individual has ordinarily to be a living person and there could be no assessment on a dead person. With regard to the legal fiction, as has been created Under Section 159 of the Act, their Lordships of the Supreme Court referring to their earlier decision in the case of Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar (sic.) observed that legal fictions are only for a definite purpose for which they are created and should not be extended beyond that limited field. The same principle was reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of First Addl. ITO v. Mrs. Suseela Sadanandan [1965] 57 ITR 168 where it was held that on the death of a person the Income-tax Officer has to proceed against the executor and/or legal representative of the deceased. The proposition laid down by the Supreme Court in the above cases was followed by the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Shantilal C. Mehta [1978] 113 ITR 79 where it was held that on the death of an assessee, his estate remains liable for payment of taxes accruing both before and after his death. After the death of the assessee, the assessment proceedings can only continue in the name of his legal representative. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. C.V. Raghava Reddy [1984] 148 ITR 385 following the same principle held that Under Section 159 a proceeding could be continued against the legal representative of the deceased assessee only if it had been initiated when the assessee was alive. It is thus well settled that an assessment made on a dead person would, on the face of it, be a nullity in law."
TO vs. Late Som Nath Malhotra (ITAT Delhi)

S. 148/ 292BB: Issue of notice in the name of the deceased person renders the assessment order null and void even if the order is passed in the name of the legal heir. The fact that the legal heir attended the proceedings does not make it a curable defect u/s 292BB

The AO issued notice dated 31.03.2010 u/s 148 of the Act in the name of the deceased assessee and also mentioned in the body of the assessment order that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee by Post within the statutory time period prescribed. Though the legal heir of the deceased assessee informed the AO that the assessee had expired and the return in the name of deceased assessee was filed by the legal heir, the AO did not issue any notice u/s 148 of the Act or 143(2) of the Act in the name of the legal heir. Therefore, the assessment framed by the AO on the basis of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act in the name of the deceased assessee was invalid and void ab initio

I.T.A. No.90 /Asr/2015
Assessment year 2013-14
Page 1 of 7
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
[Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and A.D. Jain JM]
I.T.A. No.90/Asr /2015
Assessment year: 2013-14
Sibia Healthcare Private Limited ..........................Appellant
St No. 8, Ajit Road, Bhatinda 151 001
[TAN: PTLS15043A]
Vs.
Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS), ............................Respondent
Centralized Processing Cell, Ghaziabad
Appearances by:
Ashwani Kalia for the appellant
Tarsem Lal for the respondent
Date of concluding the hearing : June 09, 2015
Date of pronouncing the order : June 09, 2015
O R D E R
Per Pramod Kumar:
1. By way of this appeal, the assessee has called into question correctness of
the order dated 13th October 2014 passed by the learned CIT(A) upholding levy of
fees, under section 234 E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the assessee and by way
of intimation dated 11th January 2014 issued under section 200A in respect of
processing of TDS statements the third quarter of the financial year 2012-13. The
appeal is time barred by 62 days but the assessee has filed a petition seeking
condonation of this delay. Having perused the condonation petition and having rival
contentions on the same, we are inclined to condone the delay and proceed to take
up the matter on merits. Delay condoned.

10. In view of the above discussions, in our considered view, the adjustment in
respect of levy of fees under section 234E was indeed beyond the scope of
permissible adjustments contemplated under section 200A. This intimation is an
appealable order under section 246A(a), and, therefore, the CIT(A) ought to have
examined legality of the adjustment made under this intimation in the light of the
scope of the section 200A. Learned CIT(A) has not done so. He has justified the levy
of fees on the basis of the provisions of Section 234E. That is not the issue here.
The issue is whether such a levy could be effected in the course of intimation under
section 200A. The answer is clearly in negative. No other provision enabling a
demand in respect of this levy has been pointed out to us and it is thus an admitted
position that in the absence of the enabling provision under section 200A, no such
levy could be effected. As intimation under section 200A, raising a demand or
directing a refund to the tax deductor, can only be passed within one year from the
end of the financial year within which the related TDS statement is filed, and as the
related TDS statement was filed on 19th February 2014, such a levy could only have
been made at best within 31st March 2015. That time has already elapsed and the
defect is thus not curable even at this stage. In view of these discussions, as also
I.T.A. No.90 /Asr/2015
Assessment year 2013-14
Page 7 of 7
bearing in mind entirety of the case, the impugned levy of fees under section 234 E
is unsustainable in law. We, therefore, uphold the grievance of the assessee and
delete the impugned levy of fee under section 234E of the Act. The assessee gets
the relief accordingly.
11. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Pronounced in the open court on 9th day
of June, 2015.

correct
assessee can claim set off according to his priority ,i.e whatever beneficial to him.

i ALSO READ THIS TWO ARTICLE.I AM CONFUSED,.I HAVE GIVEN THE DETAILS. CAN YOU GUIDE ME HOW TO TAKE CREDIT,WHAT IS AMOUNT OF CREDIT AVAILABLE.THANX IN ANTICIPATION.

yes you can set off the payments so made against the future payments due for service tax if payment for such recipt does not receive. there is a provision in return to show such set off taken.

If not within 8 kms from municpal area,it is not taxable at all.43CA not applicable

Assessee total turnover- 3,60,00,000 nepal export sales- 1,70,00,000 total profit - Rs. 44,00,000 tax paybale - Rs. 11,33,000 total tax deducted by nepal purchaser- Rs. 12,05,000 how much credit is to be allowed ? what is the formula ? which article of DTTA will apply ?

HOW CAN DEPARTMENT TAKE ACTION AGAINST CA"S. THEY ARE THE PERSONS WHO ARE PROVIDING THEM EVERY LEGAL OR ILLEGAL FACILITIES IN ONE OR THE OTHER FORM.IT IS A DEEP ROOTED NEXUS WHICH IS VERY DIFFICULT TO BREAK.

Poor assesses : whether the word is true ? how many of are showing their real income and paying taxes ? do we advise our clients to be honest in their financial results for the devlopment of the country ? We have more four vehicles owners that the income tax payee.
Don,t as professional we have responsibility of guiding and asking our clients to pay correct taxes ? why every lectuer is for the government ? Are we not citizen of this country ?
It is my sincere request to all the members of this group,kindly change your attitude .