Messages

the question is not clear.  If the cash deposited is from legitimate source what is the worry?  Why to withdraw the money?

There is one judgement of the Aurangabad Bench on the issue raised as to whether the provision applies to individual or to business.  I give below the judgement.
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH

Ghai Construction*

v.

State of Maharashtra

S.J. VAZIFDAR AND P.R. BORKAR, JJ.
W.P. NO. 4368 OF 2006
APRIL 30, 2007
Section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Tax Audit - Whether in case of an individual carrying on business as a sole proprietor, it is necessary to comply with provisions of section 44AB only in respect of his business income and not in respect of his other income - Held, yes

Thirupathy Venkatachalapathy is very influential for two reasons: a) there is lot of wealth and income b) there are lakhs of devotees from all over India.  Any step by any political party which denies the benefit of 80G is likely to fall out of favour of the people who come to pay their respects to Thirupathy Venkatachalapathy .  That is not the case with other temples.  You may quote any judgement, but the result is it will be treated as a religious activity.  I do not by which government, but an amend was made whereby it was enacted that a trust may apply 5% of its income for charitable purposes and yet avail of the benefit of 80G. 

one may keep in mind the followig decision.
Before initiating penal proceedings the assessing officer should be satisfied that there is a ground for levy of penalty.  In this context satisfaction means making up onae's own mind.  It is essentially a condition of mind, a mind not troubled by doubt, a mind that has reached a clear conclusion.  Such satisfaction should be derived in the course of any proceedings under the Act.  Jiten & Co., v/s STO 39 STC 308 (Delhi)

In section 68, section 271 and Sec.14A etc. speaks of satisfaction of the Assessing Officer.  There are no standards or measures to determine when the AO could be said to be satisfied before invoking those provisions.  Can the satisfaction vary from Officer to Officer?  Since the AO is put in higher pedestal than the ordinary citizens an ordinary citizen cannot apply his own standards.  Can anyone suggest to me what are the prerequisites to decide whether there is satisfaction of the AO?

FORM 3CA IS THE REPORT FORM WHERE THE ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED UNDER ANY OTHER LAW.  IN THIS EVENT ONLY COPIES ARE TO BE ANNEXED AND GIVE INFORMATION REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 3CD.  HENCE THERE IS NO QUESTION OF CORRECTING THE AUDIT REPORT OF THE STATUTORY AUDITOR OR SUPPLIMENTING IT.  THE INFORMATION REQUIRED IN FORM 3CD IF IT CONFLICTS WITH THE STATUTORY REPORT BE IT SO BE.  IN TAX AUDIT REPORT OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO THE DEPARTMENT AND NEITHER THE OFFICER NOR THE CLIENT IS BOUND BY THE REPORT

IT LOOKS THAT THERE IS NO MEANING ATTACHED TO PANCH IN PANCHAS.  EVEN ACCEPTING THAT THE MEANING OF PANCHAS AS GIVEN IN THE JUDGEMENT - OF TWO WITNESSES WHO SHOULD BE IMPARTIAL AND WITNESS TO THE PROCEEDINGS OF RAID, IT IS NOTICED THAT NORMALLY IT IS OBSERVED THAT TWO NEIGHBOURS OF THE ASSESSEE IF POSSIBLE OR ANY OTHER TWO PERSONS ARE CALLED AND THEIR SIGNATURE OBTAINED.  THEY DO NOT REMAIN PRESENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCEEDINGS OR CONCLUSION OF THE PROCEEDINGS OR DURING THE PROCEEDINGS.  ONE WOULD REMEMBER THAT AFTER NANAVATI MURDER CASE THE SYSTEM OF JURY WAS ABOLISHED AS NO ONE WAS PREPARED TO SIT AS JURY DURING THE TRIAL PROCEEDINGS AS PEOPLE ARE BUSY WITH THEIR OWN BUSINESS.  SIMILAR IS THE CASE OF PANCHAS DURING THE RAID.  THE SO CALLED PANCHAS HAVE NO TIME TO WITNESS THE PROCEEDINGS AND BLINDLY SIGN THE DOCUMENTS PRESENTED TO THEM.  ONLY THE OFFICERS CHOSE THE PANCHAS AND NO OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO MAKE HIS OBSERVATIONS.

Courts and Tribunals have expressed themselves what is the initial proof required to be submitted to the assessing autority.  It is not sufficient to file a confirmation from the lender or crediltor or for that matter furnishing of PAN and bank account details.  What details the courts expect the assessees to maintain to discharge the initial onus?  I refer to the decision of the Kerala high Court in [2012] 20 taxmann.com 402 (Kerala) Whether where assessee only produced confirmation letters from creditors without any further material regarding identity, status or capacity of creditors or even dates on which impugned loans were given, addition made by Assessing Officer could not be faulted with. 

and also reference of the GUJ HC order/CITATION

can you provide me the copy of the ITAT order?  I will be obliged.

THE RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 WAS FILED ON 30TH OCTOBER 2010.  THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 WAS COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143(1) ON 31ST JULY 2011.  THE ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 WAS COMPLETED ON 30TH NOVEMBER 2011 UNDER SEC.143(3)  TREATING CERTAIN LOSSES AS SPECULATION LOSS UNDER SEC.73 AND ALLOWED TO BE CARRIED FORWARD.  THERE IS PROFIT IN SHARE TRADING IN 2010-11 AND THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO GET THE SET OFF IN 2010-11.  THE TIME LIMIT FOR REVISING THE RETURN FOR ASST. YEAR 2010-11 IS OVER NOR APPEAL COULD BE FILED SINCE THE TIME LIMIT IS OVER.  CAN THE ASSESSEE SEEK RECTIFICATION UNDER SEC.154 OR SHOULD HE SEEK REVISION SINCE THE ITO SUO MOTO NOT WILLING TO RECTIFY THE 143(1) ORDER.

IN 295 ITR 437 the court proceeded on the presumption that Mahabharat and Ramayan were religious texts.  Whether they are really religious books.  Because of the advocacy of high moral principles and how rama lived or Krishna stood for principles and consequently became ideal heroes, they cannot be declared as religious.  In USA, UK, China, Japan or that matter in any other country these books are simply literature and not religious texts.  These books were popular books in those days and today with a section of people as Shakespeares dramas, Kalidasa Sakuntalam etc. In Tamil Naadu there are temples dedicated to MGR and Jayalalita and tomorro any biography of these people written can become religious activity if the books Mahabhagwat, Mahabharat and Ramayans are religious texts.  This issue was not argued before the AP High Court though Dr.Radhakrishnan hailed from Andhra who said 'HINDUISM IS A WAY OF LIFE AND NOT A RELIGION'

Before rejection of books of accounts the assessing Officer should point out specific defects in the books of accounts resulting in non verifiability of the book results.  Suppression  of sales, overstatement of purchases, inflation of expenses these are the modes used for falsification of accounts.  But these are not visible from the books but has to come from sources outside the books.  The question arises whether the books and averments of third parties could be used against the assessee.  The AO has to rely either on the books of accounts of the assessee or the books of the third party or reject both the books.  Could the AO use selectively the books of the third party?

conducting Bhagwat Katha is considered as a religious activity by the ITAT in [2012] 20 taxmann.com 221 (Jaipur - Trib.)  The serials Shree Krishna, Sampurna Ramayana etc. is considered as entertainment  What is the difference between Bhagwat Katha and these pictures/serials.  In olden days when electronic, or mechanical entertainments were not available people used to entertain themselves by Dances, Drama, Singing, Story telling etc.  Though these modes are not completly discontinued, and it continues in some form, could it be said religious.  Bhagwat Katha is telling the stories from Maha Bhagwat.  The participants attend these with piety and discipline.  When there is no religion called Hindu - Hindu is a sanskriti and culture exclusive to India how could it become religious.  I think the Courts need to address the issue instead of coming from assumptions.

the issue is whether the third party averments could be used against the assessee even assuming an opportunity is given without bringing on record material to show that the entries in the books of the assessee is bogus.  It is likely that the third party in order to escape his liability may delare himself a name lender.  It is the basic assumption that the books of an assessee is true unless it is proved otherwise.