Download The Direct Tax Code Revised Discussion Paper 2010

The question whether contract manufacturing agreements are subject to s. 194C has been decided by the Bombay High Court in Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd ITA No. 2256 of 2009 and other matters in favour of the assessees. In an oral judgement pronounced today 12th March 2010, the Court held that while “works contracts” were subject to TDS under section 194C, “sales contracts” were not. It upheld the arguments of the pharmaceutical companies that the contract manufacturing agreements entered into by them with other manufacturers amounted to a “sales contract” which was not liable to TDS u/s 194C. The text of the judgement shall be made available shortly.

The Finance Bill 2010, the Notes on Clauses & the Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill are available for download.

The Finance Act, 2005 introduced a levy namely Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) on the value of certain fringe benefits as contained in Chapter XII H (Sections 115 W to 115 WL) of Income Tax Act, 1961. By the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009 a new Section 115 WM was inserted to abolish the FBT with effect from Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11. Consequently, benefits given to employees are taxed as perquisites in the hands of employees in terms of amendments to Clause 2 of Section 17 of Income Tax Act, 1961. However, during the current Financial Year 2009-10 some assessees have paid “advance tax in respect of fringe benefits” for Assessment Year 2010-11. In such cases the Board has decided that any installment of “advance tax paid in respect of fringe benefits” for A.Y. 2010-11 shall be treated as Advance Tax paid by assessee concerned for A.Y. 2010-11. The assessee can adjust such sum against its advance tax obligation in respect of income for A.Y. 2010-11 or in case of loss etc claim such payment as refund as advance tax paid in A.Y. 2010-11

The provisions of sub-section (2) to sub-section (5) of section 144C are quite clear that a choice has been given to the assessee either to go before the DRP or to prefer the normal appellate channel. It is again clarified that it is the choice of the assessee whether to file an objection before the Dispute Resolution panel against the draft assessment order or not to exercise this option and file an appeal later before CIT (Appeals) against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer.

For past sometime the Board has been concerned about the need for improving general quality of scrutiny assessments on a sustainable basis. In this connection, reference is invited to Board’s instruction No. 2/2006 dated 27.04.2006 which required monitoring of scrutiny assessments by Range Heads under the powers available to them under section 144A of Income tax Act. Instructions have also been issued from time to time for strengthening the machinery for review of assessments and inspection of assessment charges. However, it is felt that there is significant scope for improving the quality of scrutiny system. The matter came up for discussion during 25th Annual Conference of Chief Commissioner of Income tax held in August 2009. A presentation was made by CCIT Chandigarh outlining a scheme for improving quality assessments implemented in NWR Region. After taking into account various suggestions, it was decided to devise a similar scheme with appropriate flexibility for country-wide implementation.

The Income-tax (13th Amendment) Rules, 2009 was notified on 18th December 2009. It substitutes Rule 3 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The text of the Notification can be downloaded here.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the class of cases of TPAs and insurance companies, the Board has decided that no proceedings u/s 201 may be initiated after the expiry of six years from the end of financial year in which such payment have been made without deducting tax at source etc by the TPAs. The Board is also of the view that tax demand arising out of Section 201(1) in situations arising above, may not be enforced if the deductor(TPA) satisfies the officer in charge of TDS that the relevant taxes have been paid by the deductee assessee (hospitals etc.). A certificate from the auditor of the deductee assessee stating that the tax and interest due from deductee assessee has been paid for the assessment year concerned would be sufficient compliance for the above purpose. However, this will not alter the liability to charge interest under Section 201 (1 A) of the Income Tax Act till payment of taxes by the deductee assessee or liability for penalty under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act as the case may be.

The International Tax Conference will be hosted by the Asia-Oceania Tax Consultants’ Association (AOTCA) which is the international body for tax professionals in the Asia-Oceania region – in association with the All India Federation of Tax Practitioners (A1FTP). This Conference …

AOTCA MUMBAI MEETING 2009 Read More »