The Finance Ministry has written a letter dated 24.12.2013 pointing out that the Tax Administration Reform Commission (“TARC”) has been set up to recommended measures to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the tax administration system.
The TARC has identified specific issues and problems which require to be addressed. For this purpose a meeting will be held on 22.01.2014 where the suggestions and recommendations of tax payers and tax professionals will be considered.
All tax payers and tax professionals are requested to send in their suggestions to editor@itatonline.info so as to enable us to convey the same to the TARC at the said meeting.
TARC letter dt. 24.12.2013 inviting suggestions from tax payers & professionals (249.8 KiB, 1,678 hits)
Create Wealth to Create Jobs
Our current Personal Income Tax slabs are :
> Up to Rs 2.0 Lakhs………………….. NIL
> 2.1 Lakh – 5.0 Lakh……………….. 10 %
> 5.1 Lakh – 10.0 Lakh………………. 20 %
> More than Rs 10 lakh……………….. 30 %
That means , the more you earn , the more tax you pay !
How does this wrong tax regime hurt our economy ?
This regime ,
> Punishes honest people
> Penalizes wealth creation
> Encourages creation of ” Black Money ”
> Provides incentive for tax evasion
> Diverts resources into unproductive assts such as cash/gold/land etc
> Stops people from working harder / smarter
With this regime , people tend to ask :
> Why should I work hard and earn more , if the more I earn the more I
pay ?
> Why not evade paying taxes by hiding real income ?
> How will I ever be able to buy that 1 room flat costing Rs 50 lakhs ? I
need Rs 20 lakhs by way of black money to buy it ! Where do I get that ?
> For every rupee that the government collects from me as tax , only 15
paise come back to me in the form of civic amenities .
A few years back , the tax regime was worse !
One ended up paying , by way of tax , Rs 0.93 from every rupee earned !
And after heaping on the honest tax-payers , all such disincentives , how much does our government collect by way of taxes ?
> Total Tax Receipts ……………………………….. Rs 12.4 Lakh Crores
> Personal Income Tax contributes………………..Rs 2.47 Lakh Crores
Is there a way to raise that Rs 2.47 lakh Crores to Rs 247 Lakh Crores ?
Can we raise it by 100 FOLD ?
I am not an Economist ( my advantage ! )
So , here is my crazy suggestion
” Inverse ” the tax slabs as follows :
> Up to Rs 2 lakhs………………… NIL
> 2.1 – 5.0 lakhs…………………. 10 %
> 5.1 – 10 lakhs………………….. 8 %
> 10.1 – 20 lakhs…………………. 6 %
> 20.1 – 50 lakhs………………… 5 %
> 50.1 – 100 lakhs………………… 3 %
> Above 100 lakhs…………………. 1 %
What is likely to happen with such ” INVERSE TAXATION ” regime ?
Following few things :
> Total personal tax payer base will go up dramatically from current 4
crores tax-payers
> Total personal tax collection too , will rise dramatically
> Today , only 1 % of 4 crores tax payers ( approx 4 lakhs ) , contribute
nearly 63 % of personal tax revenue ( of Rs 2.47 lakh crores )
This ratio will change to , may be , 20 % of tax payers !
> with this ” INVERSE TAX REGIME ” , there will be no incentive to evade
taxes and to generate ” BLACK MONEY ”
The more you disclose as your income , the less you pay by way of taxes
> For a change , we will learn to reward honesty / efficiency / productivity !
No need to bribe those Income Tax officers !
> Suddenly , lakhs of crores of BLACK MONEY , stashed away in bank
lockers / gold / land – and , of course those Swiss bank accounts – will ,
suddenly become ” WHITE MONEY ” !
> There will be a huge surge in bank deposits ( – even with , the inevitable
lower interest rates )
> Banks will be awash with funds to finance businesses / infrastructure
projects etc , encouraging entrepreneurs / self-employed to set up new
businesses ( at 2 % interest rates of loans ) and generate millions of jobs
> There will be a phenomenal rise in Capital Markets
Now couple this ” INVERSE TAX REGIME ” , with the following ” TAX FREE ” investment schemes , by creating Special Purpose Vehicles ( SPV ) :
> NaMo MEGA-CITY SPV
To implement Narendra Modi’s ambitious project to build 100 smart cities,
at an investment of Rs 70 lakh crores , in next 5 years
This project alone will create 5 million new jobs , every year
> RaGa MEGA – JOBS SPV
To implement Rahul Gandhi’s equally ambitious project to provide jobs to
50 million youth over the next 5 years , at an investment of Rs 50 lakh
crores
In my opinion , such ” INVERSE TAX REGIME ” , coupled with the above mentioned SPVs , will herald an ” ECONOMIC ECO – SYSTEM “, which,
> will create jobs
> shun tax evasion
> reduce corruption
> convert all BLACK MONEY into WHITE MONEY
> channelize these WHITE MONEY into nation-building projects
To complete this ECO SYSTEM , we need to think ” Out of the Box ” in the matter of Corporate Tax Regime , as well
Current trend in industry , all over the world , is to
> Add highly productive , very expensive machinery to ” Automate ” all
manufacturing processes
> Reduce manpower by increasing ” Capital / IT Intensity ”
> Hire low skilled workers by transferring higher ” Skills ” to machinery
> Outsource manufacturing to countries where manpower is cheap
> Move out of ” Manufacturing ” and shift to ” Services ”
India cannot swim against this World-wide Trend
We must innovate, to not only survive but to grow in this scenario
Here is my suggestion :
Set in motion , ” INVERSION of JOB REDUCTION ” regime , under which ,
” The more jobs a company creates , the less Corporate Tax it pays ”
Example :
> Up to employment of 100 persons …………………………. 30 % tax
> 101 – 500 persons……………………………………………. 25 %
> 501 – 1000 persons …………………………………………… 20 %
> 1001 – 5000 persons ………………………………………….. 15 %
> 5001 – 10,000 persons …………………………………………. 10 %
> Above 10,000 persons …………………………………………. 5 %
Let us celebrate those who provide employment to large number of persons
Let us celebrate BIGNESS
Let us create hundreds of WORLD SIZE corporations and take on the World
On top of this , provide additional tax – breaks ( discounts ? ) to corporate as follows :
> Average Age of Employees at 30 years………………….. 1 %
> Ave age at 25 years…………………………………………. 2 %
> Ave age at 20 years …………………………………………. 3 %
Of course , very strict and transparent rules will need to be framed to
compute,
> Number of Employees ( Permanent – not probationers / trainees )
> Average Age ( as on 31 March of Tax year )……etc
But , here is an important aspect of this ,
” Incentivize Job Creation ” Scheme
Today’s labour laws make it extremely difficult – if not impossible – for employers to layoff / retrench workmen , if demand shrinks
Hence , to take advantage of this Scheme , employers are unlikely to hire thousands of youth , if they cannot easily trim the workforce , to match the shrinking demand
So , an important corollary of this Scheme is to modify our existing Labour Laws to facilitate layoff / retrenchment , when situation so demands , while protecting the interests of the workmen concerned
And , last but not the least , permit each and every candidate – and the political parties as well – to spend ANY AMOUNT on election campaigns ,
without any restrictions as also accept any amount of Corporate Donations
by cheque
I rest my case !
* hemen parekh ( 27 Feb 2014 / Mumbai )
Sections should be clearly drafted in order to avoid more than one interpretations. Certain words cause difficulty in understanding the spirit of the section. E.g., the words “source of income” in Section 80IA. Sections should contain minimum subs sections and clauses. To bring out the intention, illustrations may be given as part of the section. Sections 80IA and 80IB cause enough confusion in the matter of interpretations.
Provisions bestowing benefits to assessees must be simple, clear and without many conditions. The assessing officers should not resort to fanciful, narrow and arbitrary interpretations. Section 10(38) is a typical case. The long term capital loss arising out of sale of equity share (which was subjected to STT) is not allowed to be set off against the long term capital gains arising out of sale of other assets. Section 10(38) does not and cannot prevent the operations Sections 70(3) and 74(1). The assessing authority’s view is: If the capital gain in respect of an asset is exempt, then the capital loss (which is “negative income” in their view) is also exempt and outside the sphere of computation provisions and there is no question of set off or carry forward.
People do business for making profit. If they make loss, it is bad luck. The loss should not be set off or allowed to be carried forward except in the case of manufacturing units.
There is no logic in allowing depreciation on assets which provide certain convenience only. Eg., motor cars, office furniture, office equipment, office air conditioners, fans, water coolers etc.
In order to discourage creation of black money, incentive should given for persons declaring higher profits/income. Capital Gains in respect of immovable property should be presumed as 10% of the fair price determined by the Registering Authority and taxed at normal rights. Loss under any head of income can be set off against the income under the Capital Gains. There should not be any distinction between long term and short term capital assets in respect of immovable property.
Most of the appeal cases are decided in favour of the assesses. A good deal of appeal cases are similar and repetitive in nature. Even on matters, where clear and unambiguous decision are made starting from Commissioner of Appeals to the level of Supreme Court, the assessing officers make assessment without considering such orders/judgments. This clearly indicates that the assessing officers do not apply their mind in the assessment proceedings and that they are not aware of the latest decisions.
A compendium of high courts/Supreme Court judgements should be made and updated from time to time. The assessing officers should be advised to follow the rulings so that unnecessary appeals can be avoided and lot of money saved by the Department.
I am giving below a few suggestions:
A TAXATION OF COMPANIES
This is a major component of tax revenue
a. Currently companies claim depreciation at the rates specified in the Income Tax Act , as against a substantial lower depreciation provided as per the provisions of the Companies Act. The rates specified as per the Companies Act , read with lots of concessions provided by notifications results in a much lower depreciation as against a higher amount of depreciation worked out on the basis of the rates as per the Income Tax Act.
b To bridge the gap of “profits” as per tax return to actual profit as per the audited accounts,which arises mainly due to the excess of tax depreciation over book depreciation, resort is taken to levy Minimum Alternate Tax .
c To avoid all the additional problems of MAT etc, the simpler method would be to restrict the amount of deduction for “Depreciation”,to:
( i) the amount provided as depreciation in the books of account provided that it does not exceed the amount of depreciation as per the rates under the Income Tax Act
( ii) The provision should apply to both private and public companies.
d. Due to rising rates of exchange ( rupee loosing out) exporters are making higher profits ( even after higher costs of some inputs etc), some concessions can be withdrawn
AS A RESULT IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO LOWER CORPORATE TAX RATES BY ELIMINATING THE SURCHARGES. ALTERNATE MINIMUM TAX CAN BE SCRAPPED
B IMPLEMENTING TDS PROVISIONS TO BE MADE LOGICAL AND TAX PAYER (SPECIALLY SENIOR CITIZEN) FRIENDLY
(a) Currently the Tax department refuses to grant credit for TDS even when the Tax payer ( the assessee claiming credit) has a Form 16A issued by the deductor on the ground that the same does not figure in the Tax Department’s statement (equivalent to Form 26AS)
(b) The Tax department refuses the claim for credit when the assessee can prove that he received the “net” after tax amount and it is backed up by a Form 16A issued in the regular course.
(c) The department wants the assesse to chase the deductor for his failure to do a proper rporting
(d) The department is ignoring the fact that the IT Act has made the deductor an “agent” of the Government to deduct at source and pay it to the credit of the Government and issue a Form 16A.
(e) The Tax Department has compounded the problem by making the tax return “paperless” . FURTHER THE ISSUE IS MADE EVEN MORE HOPELESS BY MAKING THE CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTER BENGALURU TO PROCESS(ASSESS) AND ISSUE NOTICE U/S 143 (1).
CPC only wants “on line” response etc. Every one can not be computer savy
(f) The Tax Department has not paid any heed to the warnings of the Delhi High court in SUO MOTO case .
(g) It is not possible to ask banks like SBI,HDFC etc to write to the Tax department to correct its records etc.
(h) The Government has all the powers to isue notices and act against erring “agents” (the deductors)
(i) The Tax department should have a proper procedure for ensuring that credit is granted when the tax payer has a Form 16A with him
1. The tax on capital gains need to be abolished. It is tantamounts to capital punishment, as opined by Hon’ble High Court Judges in several cases. The issues of substituting with guide line values of the Registration department and deeming of the difference as capital gain and the difference treated as income in the hands of buyers is unnatural provision.Abolition of levy of tax would result in higher values in records and generation of higher capital would result in higher incomes and revenues.
2. Discrimination to HUF assesses
The following are the areas,where HUF is not eligble for the benefits.
i.Sec.80C(xvii) envisages deduction of tuition fees paid that falls within the cap of Rs.l lakh. Sub.sec.4©provides that the said deduction is available to two children of individual. Thereby HUF is excluded for this deduction though it bears tuition of its members
ii. Sec.87A Rebate of incometax of Rs.2000 in cases where total income doesnot exceed Rs. 5 lakhs is confined to individual assessee ony
iii.Sec.80E – Deduction towards interest on education loan for higher education is available to individual only.
In respect of HUF making the payments under the above categories for its members, deduction must be allowable.
3. Excesses in survey operations u/s.133A.
A battery of personnel of the IT Department visit for survey . They act in such a way to bring pressure and in some cases threaten assesses. They are not allowed
to make any phone even for personal calls. They behave in a very dogmatic and rude way so that they can make an assessee to yield to their targets.Its a search operations in the guise of survey action. It is seen in majority of the cases that no incriminating material or variation in stocks and cash is found. But an assessee is made to admit income in the subsequent sworn statement at IT office. There are also demands for money to them. Again at the time of assessment ,there is a proposal to add to the income already admitted and deamand money to desist from it. On the whole , it is a matter for harassment and they play all tricks in forcing gullible assessee. The officers donot appreciate the disclosures in the return of income and believe that what they get admitted in the survey is the real income. . They flout all the legal procedures and devoid of decency.
They also claim that budget is falling short and they must get more tax.
It is high time that this is curbed to stop the high-handedness. If any survey or search is required, let it take place in the presence of a Judicial Magistrate.
They witnesses are only mute and they only sign at the places marked.
4. In scrutiny assessments too, the ITOs make heavy additions to appear clean on record and demand money on making assessment. They make estimates of income over the turnovers and pressurize to accept saying that if a survey were to take place, the addition would be still higher. There is no judicious approach to the case. Of late, it is disgusting with many of the officers. They are holding threats and making addtitions and for their personal gains. There is no quality work in the scrutiny assessment barring few officers.
The tax payers should not be put to the above inconvenience .The pride of the IT Department is eroded.
The officers should be made to act judiciously with control by the Commissioner of I.T.
5. Sec.40(ia) second proviso w.e.from A.Y.2013/14 envisages that if there is failure to deduct tax, he shall be deemed to have complied with the provision ,if resident payee files its return disclosing the receipt.
The above is a beneficial provision and the same may be given effect from the inception of the said sec. from A.Y. 2005-06. This is because TDS is only a method of collecting tax and where payee paid tax and filed return requirement of making TDS to comply with sec.40(ia) is avoidable requirement.
Subject: Budgetary Proposals and Income Tax Act & Rules & Service Tax
In the course of practice and based on general experience gained I observed certain anomalies in the existing tax systems as well I found some of them as incomplete or need upgrading to meet today’s need. Some issue is to plug the revenue leakage. The observations are related to aspects given in ensuing paras and for each aspect a separate sheet with reasons and benefits are prepared for your consideration and action. Looking to present environment situation and nation interest if you find it fit proper please take action at proper time.
In entire process I do not have any personal interest of what so nature and prepared to plug revenue leakage area and better compliance of Law. Certain suggestion has social reasons and they are mentioned at appropriate place.
The summary of suggestion is as follow
1- Issues relating to TDS
a) Misuse of filing of FORM 15G/15 H to claim interest as exempt and not offering the same to tax as income
a) TDS for unspecified services on introduction of Negative List
b) ETDS issues and issuance of Form 16 and 16A from website
c) Extension of due dates for filing TDS return
1 Suggestion for provisions of Section 80C and 80CCC
a) TDS for unspecified services on introduction of Negative List
b) Misuse of filing of FORM 15G/15 H to claim interest as exempt and not offering the same to tax as income
The following principles should be followed while legislating any tax laws as we have to prove that we are true Civilize / Democratic Country:
1. Laws to be respectable, must be fair and intelligible, stable and simple, easy to administer and easy obey.
2. If there is a wide spread evasion, it may be more meaningful to search for the cause and tax system than in the taxpayer.
3. Our tax legislations should follow the best practices of the civilized country like Denmark, Netherland and Singapore and not the worst practices of uncivilized countries.
4. We should look to the long term benefit of the tax legislation to the economy and therefore, we should not indulge into legislating bad /uncivilized laws for the short term gains like present practice of the Government fixing quota for tax collections, which has totally ruined our economy.
General points:
Finance Ministers and CBDT have filed to realize how counter-productive their efforts are to the national economy. The present practices of breach of trust (e.g. charging of MAT to SEZ Developers and SEZ unit), retrospective amendments, levy taxes on notional basis and widening the scope of Transfer Pricing provision and illegitimate amendments, by the current Government/FM should be stopped and corrective actions must be taken to undone all these unethical practices by them in the last ten years of its ruling.
All amendments introduced in the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the last ten years, with vengeance by the Finance Ministry to reverse the decisions of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Courts, must be deleted / cancelled, forthwith.
There must be a legislation to the effect that while introducing any major amendments in the Direct/Indirect taxes areas, it should be strictly evaluated by the select committee of the Parliament and by the tax experts like Tax Advocates, Chartered Accountants etc. The present practice of introducing such amendments at the whimsies of the Finance Minister or CBDT should be stopped.
It is high time and absolute necessary to introduce sever penalty / accountability on the tax administrators (assessing officers, commissioner of appeals etc.) for gross violation of provisions of the Act, for high pitch assessments, misuse of coercive powers, for delay in passing the rectification orders, appeal effect orders, for wrongly withholding refunds due to the assessee etc.
Proposed Direct Tax Code should be scrapped. New DTC with 314 sections, twenty two schedules and new definition section alone has 297 sub-sections., in addition to definitions found in various sections – the DTC itself is highly complex code all in the name of simplification and rationalization. The responsibility of formation of new Income-tax Act should be given to the Expert Committee consisting of leading Tax Advocates, Chartered Accountants, Economist but no Bureaucrats.
Specific suggestions:
1. The provisions of Sec. 206AA (PAN requirements) should not be made applicable to any Non-resident individuals as well as all foreign entities (including foreign companies) and it should be clarified to this effect retrospectively, to keep the sanctity of the provisions of Sec. 90 / Double Tax Avoidance Agreement.
2. Specific provisions should be made for accountability of the tax authorities prescribing time limits for timely passing of orders, granting refunds, disposal of applications etc. alongwith sever penalty for not adhering the time limits.
3. Specific provisions should be mad in the Income-tax Act for granting stay of demand in all cases until the disposal of the first appeal.
4. The present provisions in the Act restricting to grant refund to the assessee due as per the Return of Income filed should be removed from the statute. There must be enabling provisions in the Act to grant such refund within six months of the filing of Return by the assessee and for any delay, the tax authorities should be penalized by allowing the assessee interest on refund at higher rates for every month of delays.
5. Provisions for Domestic Transfer Pricing should be removed as there are sufficient enabling provisions u/s 40A(2)(b) and Sec. 80IA etc. At least, DTP should be delinked with or as harsh as international transfer pricing provisions.
6. New definition provided by the Finance Act 2012 in respect of ‘international transaction’ enlarging the scope of international transactions, should be removed from the statute or should be reviewed by the Expert Committee.
7. The present practice of the Income-tax Dept. to charge interest on interest as provided u/s 140A, in all cases should be curbed. In fact, there should be enabling provisions in the Act to grant interest u/s 244A on interest wrongfully withheld by the assessing authorities.
8. Practice of levy Sur-charge on Income-tax and Education Cess should be stopped, forthwith. Sur-charge of Income-tax may be levy in the rarest case / exceptional situation like war etc and not otherwise, at the whimsies of the FM. Such charging of Sur-charge and Education Cess creates absurdity and complexity for implementing on-line procedures.
9. There should be statutory provisions to curb the power of levy Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) / Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) by fixing the limit at 7.5%.
10. Incentive given to Scientific Research by way of weighted deduction should be extended to / provided under MAT provisions.
11. Provisions of Sec. 40(a)(ia) should be deleted forthwith, as there are sufficient enabling provisions u/s 201 and u/s 201(1A) to meet with defaults in TDS provisions.
12. Procedures to upload/ on-line filing of complete Audit Reports should be removed or rationalized to filing of only certificate portion of the Audit Report may be continued.
13. The rate of TDS u/s 115A in respect of Royalty and Fees for Technical Services, should be restricted to 10% as against unjustifiable rate of 25% recently introduced in the Act.
14. The provisions of Sec 195 and Sec. 9 (deeming provisions) which are grossly misused / misinterpreted / wrongly amended by the Government, should be rationalized and should be reviewed by the Expert Committee of fair and knowledgeable persons in the field.
15. The ombudsman authority should be made more effective by giving more power to take stringent actions and to cover more areas of defaulting tax authorities, to achieve legislation intent of the same in true sense for the benefit of the assessee.
16. Enabling provisions should be made in respect of Employees’ Contributions to PF, ESIC etc. should be allowed as deduction if paid before the due date of filing of Return of Income.
a) Automation in the system: Our tax department is moving in this direction but with its own pace. The Automation of the whole system with the simplicity in the taxation laws will be highly appreciated.
b) Simplicity in Tax Laws: The tax payers are loaded with number of tax laws direct and indirect. The Government requires inflow by way of taxation from the tax payers. If the concept and system gets simplified, understandable and user friendly will encourage the tax payers as well it smoothens and simplified the tax administrator work.
c) Concept of Incentives in Tax Laws: If the government incorporate the concept of incentives to tax payers encourage the tax payers to pay tax honestly. The incentives to be given in credit point form like the concept of Credit Card – you spent you get some credit point which can be encash in future. The similar credit point on account of tax payment, the tax payer can utilize against the payment to schools, hospitals, toll etc. where they are taking government services.
d) Harmony in Tax Laws: The department should clarify the important areas where lots of litigation arose and set up the guidelines to interpret the provisions which reduces the litigation and disputes between the tax payers and tax administrator.
e) Use of Standard Data: Use of standard data as benchmark for example in case of assessing transactions at arm’s length under the provisions of transfer pricing. The same should also easily available to tax payers for their own assessment. This enables to reduce unnecessary hinderances and assessment processing time.
f) Except otherwise mentioned above, if the department comes with proper guidelines based on various judgments, reduction in retrospective amendments in the acts, to bring simplicity in documents, online filing of appeals as well tracking of the case online helps to reduce the time involved for resolutions, compliance cost and strengthening the process.
Form 15CA / 15CB is the good initiative by the department. The data gathered from such files creates the good comparative data base which can be used to define the transactions in specific categories with the input from Trade Association. The same would also be shared with the tax payer to take conscious view to tax the transactions under the correct heads. The same can be bring online system base to cover all the transactions without disputes as well also encourage the foreign companies / non resident due to transparency in the taxing policy.
As department is flooding with lots of information and data from various sources. Important is to analyzed that properly, select the appropriate sources of data base and also encourage tax payers to make best use of that which reduces grievance. Most of the time the issue between tax payers and department is interpretation of law – Department wants tax (money) (Revenuecentric) and Tax payer does not want to pay or if the tax payers had already paid, department don’t refund. Therefore to reduce such issues brings the confidence amongst all.
Service Tax Basic Thresh-hold Limit for small service providers:
In view of fast growing service sector, it is seriously to be considered to enhance thresh-hold limit from the existing Rs.10 lakhs to minimum Rs.25 lakhs. It is because of speedy growth in inflation. Over a period of last two years it is observed that prevailing market rates of all items including all types of foodgrains, various products and services have considerably and steeply gone up. The overall rate of increase is significant and many fold. The value of rupee is decreased alarmingly. On account of such natural growth in the prevailing market rates, even small service providers who were in the initial bracket of Rs.10 lakhs were forced to fall in the higher brackets, keeping the same level of net incomes or even most of the times lesser incomes due to deterioration in economy due to present severe market condition. However in case of certain number of small service providers, the total collections were increased but due to stiff and cut throat competition and due to various reasons including the effect of Globalisation, and more specifically due to such severe inflation and fall in the value of rupee the net incomes were steeply fallen and these small service providers are severely affected.
On account of the above reasons, it is seriously felt as it is very necessary to increase the basic exemption limit from Rs.10 lakhs to at least Rs.25 lakhs, which should be carefully considered for proper implementation.
In reference to the suggestion for the “ Tax Administration Reforms Commission “ I hereby suggest the following:-
1. Accountability:- The assessing authorities must be made accountable for their mistakes & follies. Due to non-accountability, the corruption andharassment of the people increases.it camn also be seen that most of the appeals at higher levels are lost by department. These kind of assessments are by the Assessing Officers as they do not loose making a assessment at their whim and fancies, leading to unnecessary cost on the assessee & department too. The cost of department is also being borne by the assessee in the form of taxes.
It may to noted that for quoting a wrong PAN by Assessee penalty is Rs.10,000/- but no penalty for a assessing Officer, whose case is lost at ITAT, at the expenses of Tax Payer money.
It may be noted that , supreme court has asked to punish the policemen where the culprits go scot-free due to lack of evidence or for not handling the investigation properly.
So in my view this is possible and there will be no revenue loss, but reduction of unnecessary cost and hassle free assesses will pay more taxes.
2. Relevant Case Laws:- All relevant case laws shall be arranged section wise/itemwise & wherever the cases of the same nature have two diverging views , let only one view be adopted . These case laws should be given to all the assessing officers and assessees at large. It will be compulsory for the assessing officers to follow the case laws . It has already been decided by one of the High Court recently, that the assessing authorities must consider the case Laws which has been relied upon by the assessee.
Assessment Order :- all the income tax officers should only do the scrutiny but they can not pass an order. It may be noted that cbi does the investigation but decision of guilty and punishment is done by the court. Presently, the income tax officer does the scrutiny, passes the order, levies penalty and also goes after recovery. This is draconian . There should be a mechanism or committee , say of 2 or 3 people , one of them can be from the department, who will preliminary go through the report given in the Assessing Officer and based on the merit of the case, it should be finalized or dropped.
I am practicing Chartered Accountant.
I observed that the concerned assessing Income tax Officers are not making entry in their Manual Demand Registration as well as in computer systems. Considering this assessee and tax practisioner are facing difficulties for the incomeing assessment/intimation. Moreover assessee are not getting their due Refund in time.
In this connection I strongly suggest that they should give the acknowledgement number on submission of copy of paid challan or compliance of their respective order. And on passing the entry in boht the record they should issue a letter to the respective assessee that they have passed the entry to avoid futher litigation and harrassment to assessee and their tax practitioner. This will also have a correct picture for outstanding dues from the defaulters.
COMPLICATED TDS RULES MUST BE SIMPLIFIED ONLY ONE TDS SECTION AND UNIFORMITY OF BASIC LIMIT FOR NON DEDUCTION AND ONE STANDARD RATE FOR ALL TYPE OF TDS AND TCS AND TIME LIMIT BETWEEN LAST DATE OF DEDUCTION PAYMENT AND FILING RETURN MUST BE MINIMUM 21 DAYS AT PRESENT ONLY 7 DAYS
TAX RETURN FOR RATHER INDIVIDUAL AND HUF IT MUST BE OF FAMILY CONSIST OF HUSBUND WIFE AND MINOR SON AND DAUGHTER GIVING BASIC EXEMPTION DEPENDS UPON NUMBER OF FAMILY MEMBERS TO AVOID IN JUSTIFICATION TOWARDS SALARY EMPLOYEE AND OTHER BUSINESS PEOPLE
I have two suggestion as a tax payer as well as a professional.
1. The Salaries person is the worst affected by the current tax system. He doesn’t have any way out to escape the tax liability as the employer deducts the whole of the tax.
These persons have fixed income irrespective of the level of inflation etc which severely hampers his purchasing power. If at all they can save some money they can do it by way of FDs/RDs with
banks, the interest from which is also taxable. This adds to his miseries.
On the other hand business persons somehow manage to escape their income from the assessment thru malafide means.
Under this circumstances either a Lower Tax Slab may be introduced for salaried persons OR Higher Exemption limits may be prescribed.
2. While the investment in shares generates the funds only for specific companies and for which the number of investors are also limited, the investment in FDs/RDs can infuse the funds for banking
institutions which provide funds to Various Industries and the number of Investors are also numerous including Salaried Persons.
So, my suggestion is that Interest Income from FDs/RDs should also be exempted as is the case with Dividend Income.
1. If possible smoothen the procedure of TDS return filing e.g. procedure prescribed for Real Estate transactions should be made applicable to all transactions.
2. Refund issue process should be transparent.
3. Service Tax on all educational activities should go. 1
4. Stamp Duty paid on purchase of flat should be allowed to be adjusted against the Service Tax payable on purchase of flat or proportionate deduction should be allowed.
1. FORM 16A BE ISSUED LIKE FORM 16B (26Q BE FILLED FOR INDIVIDUAL DEDUCTION IN THE WAY FORM 26QA IS FILED.
Our suggestions:
1. There should be proper monitoring of all Rectification Applications filed. There should be proper reporting of the number of applications filed, disposed and pending disposal and concerned officer should be answerable for long pending rectifications. This is a major area of concern for common people and also a major source of corruption
2. The officers should be held responsible for making frivolous assessment orders i.e. IT department should devise a reporting format where all additions made b the concerned officers should be monitored i.e. the ratio of success of additions in orders at higher appellate levels should be monitored by the department. This can also prevent officers from making reckless additions in their assessments.
All corporate entities whose loans have been restructured, after having becoming NPAs of Indian banks, must deposit the salaries, bonuses, profit sharing bonuses and perquisites of all their Directors and Promoters to the bank concerned. Also loan repayment in accordance with the restructure wiil get precedence over the payment of such salaries and benefits. Failure to do so will be considered a criminal offence. External Auditors must quarterly attest to this compliance to the government.
suggestions to finanace ministry for tax reforms
1. it is better if VDIS type scheme is introduced
2. it is better if KVSS ( kar vivad samadhan scheme) is introduced
3.cash seized during search should be allowed to be adjusted against Advance tax liability.
4. cash seized during search should be kept in interest bearing fixed deposits.
In pursuant to said email, I understand that Tax Admin. Reform is for common people and all the grievances will be understood and reform will be set up for IMMEDIATE REMEDIES of smallest tax payer.
1. Control all expenses of all ministers (central and state) immediately, deduct all excess expenditures made by such persons from their salary/honorarium/compensation etc.
2. Fix up an exemption slab for Service Tax for the persons having income bellow taxable limits.
3. Reduce prices of domestic Gas, electricity, telephones etc.
4. Provide cheaper and quality means of livelihood to all citizens of India.
5. Don’t allow foreigners to rule our country.
capital gain tax needs reduction as this is one of the major head of income where the taxpayer avoids tax compliance by adopting various methods so for better tax compliance the government can give two options to the taxpayer one the present one with 20% tax and the other one can be named as straight line method where the tax payer pays the capital gain tax @ 10% on whole sale consideration without any deduction of cost of acquistion or cost indexation this will provide relief to owners of very old properties
Thanks for providing us an opportunity to suggest recommendations to
enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the tax administration
system.
In this regard, my suggestions are as follows:
Regarding Scrutiny Assessments:
1.There should be limit for hearing the cases of scrutiny per day.
What being happening that Ld. AO issuing notice for hearing to many
assesses on same day and same time but he is not able to attend all
due to his busyness in routine official work, Refund/Pan Transfer
query, CIT work, remand report , Second appeal to ITAT/High court etc.
2.There should be an attendance register for marking the attendance of
the assessee/A.R attending the case, keeping in view the above 1.
Otherwise there will be notices for non appearance.
3.For quality assessment there also upper cap for no of scrutiny cases
to be handle by an Assessing Officer, keeping view his other
assignments as mention in point 1 above.
4.Prior picking of the scrutiny case, satisfaction of the AO and Addl.
To be recorded on major points.
5.Questionnaire to be realistic and on specific issues not stereo
typed one for all assesseee.
6.Initial questionnaire, pending queries, Order sheet entries to be emailed
7.All order sheet entries to be mailed to the assessee.
8.Circular of Board, Orders of jurisdictional Tribunal and High Courts
should be binding on the Assessing Officer.
Regarding CIT(Appeals):
1.That there should be time limit for hearing and disposing of the case.
2.That there should be power to worthy CIT(A) for set aside the case
to AO, particularly in 144 Assessment cases.
3.That power of worthy CIT(A) regarding appeals cases should be
limited to delete, reduce or keep the demand raised by the Ld. AO.
Power of enhancement of demand should be withdrawn due to following reasons:
1. That the Ld. AO has enough powers to made any type of additions
in original assessment by applying his mind.
2 Further the Ld. AO has power u/s 154,147/148 to reopen the
assessment and make further additions.
3.Further the worthy CIT has power u/s 263 to make assessment in the
interest of Revenue.
Regarding E-filing of ITR
1.There should be no need of sending ITR-V at CPC, an alternate
mechanism should be developed to authenticate the same.
2 That before adjustment of prior year demand, a show cause notice
should be issued by providing an opportunity of hearing to the
assessee.
Regarding TDS Returns:
1.That there should be free facility of Bulk PAN Verification by
uploading excel file to avoid PAN errors. Today most errors due to
wrong PAN and wasting time in filing correction returns and
litigation.
2.There should be online PAN verification utility like as provided for
challan verification by downloading csi file. If the deductor has
prior knowledge of wrong PAN, then it may save lot of time.
3.There should be mechanism , while depositing monthly TDS challan a
list of detail of that challan containing Name, PAN, Amt paid, Tax
deducted also be get uploaded at same time. Then there will not any
need for filing of TDS returns at all.
4.Late Fees u/s 234E is very hard and excessive it should be liberal
and be recommendatory for first 2 years to aware the government
deductors.
After at all, deductors not have their own income to pay this fine,
they are just
agent of Govt in helping collection of TAX but in return they are
rewarded by Fine, interest, penalty and now late fees.
Dear All,
Our Resourceful suggestions will not be considered because our FM doesn’t listen to anybody.So there is no point in giving suggestions. Everytime when the suggestions were given before the budget,how many of them have been incorporated?????????????/
My issue is in reference with the administrative part on TRACES.
The procedure in respect extracting justification reports from TRACES for TDS demand intimation received is as follows:
1. To log in the TAN
2. To insert the provisional receipt no. of the last TDS return filed
3. To insert at least details of 3 deductees (PAN, amount) from the last return filed
4. Once the above details is oked then after sometime (generally 2 hrs) we have to check the status and then download the justification reports.
The above procedure is too long and has to be done every time for each quarter in case the error has cropped in for all the TDS quarters.
In Tier II and III cities, professionals offer TDS filing services and even though, the above procedure is not warranted for simple details of TDS returns.
Trust the above shall be heard as this will save time of all the professional and also employees working with professionals.
Sir,
TDS returns are to be filed quarterly.
Payment of TDS for the last month of the quarter is to be made before 7th of the next month and TDS return is to be filed before 15th of that month.
So consultant is left with only 8 days (6 working days) to follow up with the clients and file the returns. This pressure results in inaccuracy in the work.
So this date of filing quarterly TDS return should be extended till 21st of the month instead of 15th of the month.
This will help in filing correct returns and reduction in subsequent rectifications.
Problem in registering as a legal heir in e-filling portal, in case of businessman, there is no will
It is very difficult to obtain succession / legal heir certificate from revenue authorities in the short period of time.
Kindly take necessary action
TDS – CPC SHOULD DEVELOP THE SOFTWARE IN SUCH A WAY THAT BEFORE ISSUING OF
SUCH KIND OF NOTICES APPROVAL OF TDS OFFICERS MAY BE OBTAINED & AFTER COMPLETION OF PROPER INVESTIGATION ON THE PART OF TDS OFFICERS, NOTICES /DEMAND MAY BE RAISED. WITH NO DISCRETIONARY POWER ON THE PART OF TDS OFFICERS, JUST THEY ARE FACT FONDERS OF DEDUCTEE. THIS WILL SAVE TIME ,MONEY & ENERGY ON BOTH SIDE. DEDUCTORS WILL HAVE TO FACE ONLY GENUINE DEFAULT & & GOVERNMENT RECORDS WILL SHOW GENUINE RECOVERY INSTEAD OF FICTITIOUS & LITIGATED RECOVERY.
PLEASE FORWARD THIS TO COMMISSIONERS OF TDS,AHMEDABAD IF FOUND APPROPRIATE.
Respected Sir/Madam,
Thanks for providing us an opportunity to suggest recommendations to
enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the tax administration
system.
In this regard, my suggestions are as follows:
Regarding E-filing of ITR:
1.There should be no need of sending ITR-V at CPC, an alternate
mechanism should be developed to authenticate the same.
2.That before adjustment of prior year demand, a show cause notice
should be issued by providing an opportunity of hearing to the
assessee.
Regarding TDS Returns:
1.That there should be free facility of Bulk PAN Verification by
uploading excel file to avoid PAN errors. Today most errors due to
wrong PAN and wasting time in filing correction returns and
litigation.
2.There should be online PAN verification utility like as provided for
challan verification by downloading csi file. If the deductor has
prior knowledge of wrong PAN, then it may save lot of time.
3.There should be mechanism , while depositing monthly TDS challan a
list of detail of that challan containing Name, PAN, Amt paid, Tax
deducted also be get uploaded at same time. Then there will not any
need for filing of TDS returns at all.
4.Late Fees u/s 234E is very hard and excessive it should be liberal
and be recommendatory for first 2 years to aware the government
deductors.
Deductors not have their own income to pay this fine, they are just
agent of Govt in helping collection of TAX but in return they are
rewared by Fine, interest,penalty and now late fees.
PRACTICAL SUGGESTION TO SMOOTH WORKING ON ISSUE FOR TDS -CPC
TDS – CPC SHOULD DEVELOP THE SOFTWARE IN SUCH A WAY THAT BEFORE ISSUING OF
SUCH KIND OF NOTICES APPROVAL OF TDS OFFICERS MAY BE OBTAINED & AFTER COMPLETION
OF PROPER INVESTIGATION ON THE PART OF TDS OFFICERS, NOTICES /DEMAND MAY BE RAISED.
WITH NO DISCRETIONARY POWER ON THE PART OF TDS OFFICERS, JUST THEY ARE FACT FONDERS
OF DEDUCTEE. THIS WILL SAVE TIME ,MONEY & ENERGY ON BOTH SIDE. DEDUCTORS WILL HAVE
TO FACE ONLY GENUINE DEFAULT & & GOVERNMENT RECORDS WILL SHOW GENUINE RECOVERY
INSTEAD OF FICTITIOUS & LITIGATED RECOVERY.
Sir,
After lot of efforts over the years the measures are not forceful to strengthen transparency.Without prejudice,my personal view is given as under:
1.E filing of Balance sheet and P/L or income Expenditure account – a must for all tax payers/PAN holders even if NIL income for the previous year.
2.The contents of /items of Balance sheet and P/L or IE account -must be broken up to various schedules .Presently details of Debtors,receivables and creditors and payables are not furnished keeping space for manipulations.
3.Furnishing of information as to PAN of spouse and children irrespective of their dependence on the assessee.Dependent childrens’ education class,details of schools and monthly fees must be obtained.
4.Furnishing of information as to utilities -such as electric consumer no ,telephone no,mobile no,passprt no,vissas taken during the prev year.
5.Removing threshold limits for certain exemptions and deductions- such as jewellery purchase,sale of immovable properties.
Thanks & Regards
FOR TARC-SUGGESTION
TDS CPC DIRECTLY ISSUING LETTER/NOTICES TO DEDUCTORS TREATING THEM DEFAULTER FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 201 & 201(1A) IMMEDIATELY ON PROCESSING OF E-TDS RETURNS & RAISING SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF DEMAND FOR NON/SHORT DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE & CONSEQUENTLY CHARGING INTEREST THERE ON, CREATES HUGE CHAOS & GRIEVANCES IN THE MIND OF TAX DEDUCTORS WHO ARE PLAYING ROLL OF GOOD PARTNER WITHOUT CHARGING SINGAL PAI TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WHEN THERE ARE THE FAVOURABLE JUDGEMENTS OF COURTS AVAILABLE, ESPECIALLY, HONORABLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGE (PVT.) LTD. V/S. CIT (2007) 293 ITR 226 / 163 TAXMAN 355. & GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S. RUSHIKESH APPARTMENT CO.OP. SOC. LTD.(2002) 253 ITR 310/ 119 TAXMAN 239. WHEREIN DEDUCTOR MAY NOT BE TREATED AS DEFUALTER IN CASE DEDUCTEE HAD FILED RETURN OF INCOME INCLUDING INCOME WHICH REQUIRED FOR DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE THAN THE DEDUCTOR WOULD NOT BE TREATED AS DEFAULTER SINCE THERE IS NO REVENUE LOSS TO GOVERNMENT & THERE CANNOT BE DOUBLE TAXATION OF SAME INCOME. FURTHER, INTEREST CANNOT BE RECOVERED FROM THE DEDUCTOR FOR SHORT /NON DEDUCTION
OF TAX AS HELD IN CASE OF GUJ. HIGH COURT DECISION CITED ABOVE.THUS THERE IS PROTECTION OF INTEREST OF REVENUE.
HENCE, ISSUANCES OF LETTER /NOTICES & RAISING OF HUGE DEMAND FOR NO DEFAULT OF DEDUCTOR IS HIGHLY OBJECTIONABLE.THEREFORE IT IS SUGGESTED THAT BEFORE ISSUANCE OF LETTER/ NOTICES, THE TDS OFFICER SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE MATTER IN DEEP OF DEDUCTEE, CALL FOR THE DETAILS FROM DEDUCTEE, PROTECT THE REVENUE INTEREST & THEREAFTER ISSUE NOTICE & DEMAND CHALLAN TO DEDUCTOR IF THEY FOUND GENUINE
DEFAULTER SINCE DEDUCTORS ARE HELPING HAND OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AT NO COST TO GOVERNMENT.
TAX ADMINISTRATION REFORMS
1) Intimation under Section 143(1) by CPC and Rectification Orders under Section 154 by CPC should be made downloadable from the portal.
2) Automatic summing up of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C should be provided in e-filing Form ITR-1.
3) Reason for rectifications in the Rectification Orders under Section 154 should be clearly brought out by CPC.
4) Any change in e-filing forms should be notified in the portal immediately after the changes are incorporated.
5) Column for entering “sex” or “gender” in e-filing forms should be deleted as it has become irrelevant.
6) In e-filing forms, in Schedule of TDS, while filling particulars of Form No.16, the column of “Income Chargeable under the Head Salaries” may be excluded as it is not likely to serve useful purposes.
7) While viewing Form 26AS, there should be a facility in the portal to view it before actual downloading. At present, Form 26AS can be viewed by the assessee only after downloading it.
8) Form 26AS should be made more user-friendly. Any TDS mismatch can also be included in Form 26AS. In many cases, all AIR reporting and tax refunds are not seen included.
9) The function for import of data from earlier versions of e-filing forms, is not working properly. As a result, while uploading revised returns, assessee is required to data entry the entire particulars of the original return in case any amendment is made to e-filing forms in the portal.
10) In some cases when a revised return is prepared after the “due date”, interest under Section 234A is applied on checking tax calculations even where the entire tax payable are paid before the “due date” of filing the return.
11) Refunds due to the assessees are often not issued as the Assessing Officers have uploaded incorrect tax demands. CBDT instructions regarding adjustment by CPC of alleged tax arrears as reported by jurisdictional Assessing Officers are not properly implemented by concerned Assessing Officers with the result that refunds wrongly adjusted by CPC under Section 245 are yet to be paid to many assessees.
FOR TARC-SUGGESTION
TDS CPC DIRECTLY ISSUING LETTER/NOTICES TO DEDUCTORS TREATING THEM DEFAULTER FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 201 & 201(1A) IMMEDIATELY ON PROCESSING OF E-TDS RETURNS & RAISING SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF
DEMAND FOR NON/SHORT DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE & CONSEQUENTLY CHARGING INTEREST THERE ON, CREATES HUGE CHAOS & GRIEVANCES IN THE MIND OF TAX DEDUCTORS WHO ARE PLAYING ROLL OF GOOD PARTNER WITHOUT CHARGING SINGAL PAI TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WHEN THERE ARE THE FAVOURABLE JUDGEMENTS
OF COURTS AVAILABLE, ESPECIALLY, HONORARY SUPREME COURT DECISION IN CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGE (PVT.) LTD. V/S. CIT (2007) 293 ITR 226 / 163 TAXMAN 355. & GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE
CASE OF CIT V/S. RUSHIKESH APPARTMENT CO.OP. SOC. LTD.(2002) 253 ITR 310/ 119 TAXMAN 239. WHEREIN DEDUCTOR MAY NOT BE TREATED AS DEFUALTER IN CASE DEDUCTEE HAD FILED RETURN OF INCOME INCLUDING
INCOME WHICH REQUIRED FOR DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE THAN THE DEDUCTOR WOULD NOT BE TREATED
AS DEFAULTER SINCE THERE IS NO REVENUE LOSS TO GOVERNMENT & THERE CANNOT BE DOUBLE TAXATION OF
SAME INCOME. FURTHER, INTEREST CANNOT BE RECOVERED FROM THE DEDUCTOR FOR SHORT /NON DEDUCTION
OF TAX AS HELD IN CASE OF GUJ. HIGH COURT DECISION CITED ABOVE.THUS THERE IS PROTECTION OF INTEREST
OF REVENUE.
HENCE, ISSUANCES OF LETTER /NOTICES & RAISING OF HUGE DEMAND FOR NO DEFAULT OF DEDUCTOR IS HIGHLY
OBJECTIONABLE.THEREFORE IT IS SUGGESTED THAT BEFORE ISSUANCE OF LETTER/ NOTICES, THE TDS OFFICER
SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE MATTER IN DEEP OF DEDUCTEE, CALL FOR THE DETAILS FROM DEDUCTEE, PROTECT THE
REVENUE INTEREST & THEREAFTER ISSUE NOTICE & DEMAND CHALLAN TO DEDUCTOR IF THEY FOUND GENUINE
DEFAULTER SINCE DEDUCTORS ARE HELPING HAND OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AT NO COST TO GOVERNMENT.
1. During scrutiny under sec. 143(3), stop treating the assessee as a “bakara”(sheep) and tax avoider by the Assessing Officer (acting as Tiger) in all cases unless any “suspicious” ,not legal, matter is found.
2. If nothing is found wrong in scrutiny assessment, direct the Assessing Officer accept the return as it is without any disallowances from conveyance, travelling, telephone expenses just to show that he has made disallowances to collect the revenue.
3. In manual selection for scrutiny, no selection should be made with baised mind by Assessing Officer.
4. The limit given in sec. 40A(3) for cash payment of Rs. 20,000 is very low, need be increased to Rs. 50,000. The disallowance need be restricted to say 20% instead of 100%, in order to penalise for non-compliance.
5. The threshold limit for TDS from professional fees, rent, commission are very much on lower side. Need be increased to Rs. 1,00,000 for professional fees, Rs. 3,00,000 for rent (considering to get taxable after 30 % reduction) and Rs. 25,000 for commission.
1. SO MANY PERSONS ARE DOING ” DAY TRADING’ IN STOCK MARKET AND EARN BUT DO NOT PAY TAX THEREON. SO MINIMUM 1% TDS SHOULD BE INTRODUCED ON THE EARNING. IF THEY WANT SET OFF OF TDS, RETURN SHOULD BE FILED BY SUCH PERSONS. THIS WILL BRING LOT OF MONEY TO GOVERNMENT EXCHEQUER BECAUSE MOST OF SUCH PERSONS ARE NOT FILING RETURN. SUPPOSE SUCH PERSONS ARE INCURRING LOSS. IN THAT CASE THE CLAIM OF LOSS CAN BE ALLOWED ON FILING RETURN. THUS NEW ASSESSEE CAN BE AVAILABLE TO GOVERNMENT.
2. TDS BASE SHOULD BE ENLARGED AND LINKED WITH PAN NO. SO MANY PERSONS ARE KEEPING FDS IN BANKS. TO AVOID TDS THEY KEEP DEPOSITS IN DIFFERENT BANK IN SUCH A WAY THAT TDS MAY NOT BE ATTRACTED. SOFTWARE IS REQUIRED IN SUCH A WAY THAT FD INTEREST CAN BE LINKED WITH PAN NO. AND IT REFLECTS THE INTEREST WHEREVER KEPT ON THE BASIS OF PAN . SO THAT PERSON CAN NOT ESCAPED FROM TDS
Formation of the National Tax Tribunal to stop unending litigation by different judgments on same issue by different Courts.
much difficulty is experienced in release of seized assets and documents from the field formation.It takes years even after completion of all assessments. in case of wrong seizure 132 B is not of much help. the period for application should be increasead and benevelent direction be issued or act be ammended.appeal be provided against 132B .Appeal may also be provided against order under section 10(23) (c ) and against refusal to waive interest.
My humble suggestions are as under :
(1) A reference of section 56(2)(vii) also ought to be inserted in section 115BBE of the Act. An assessee may offer income under section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Act and may take the benefit of basic slab exemption of income not chargeable to tax.
(2) In case of company assessees, partnership firms and LLP, disclosing of interest income as business income which actually falls under the head income from other sources ought to attract penalty. Because by doing this, the corporate assessee, etc take the benefit of set-off of brought forward losses out of interest income.
Suggestion :-
1 -The Time Limit Should be fixed for the CIT to approve the funds , it is observed that normally it is considered non priority work & kept pending for long time
in spite of several visit and follow up , it causes unnecessary hardship to the assesses and consultants .
2- The data on CPC of arrears and demand should be updated and rectified promptly to avoid unnecessary follow up with the departments , it is observed normally the server is slow or the concern person give excuses and does not update the data in spite of providing all the details for long time.
Income Tax on agriculture income should be Introduced with Little tax as @ 2%(Who is the Owner of More Than 5 acres of Land),and tax on long term capital gain should be reduced to 10%,senior citizen limit for paying income tax must be extended to 3 laks,80-c exemtion limit should be extented to 1.5 laks as comapre to1 laks presently,VDIS SCHEME should also be introduced,post office recurring deposit(R.D),and Kisan Vikas Patra(KVP’s)Should be Covered under 80-C of Income Tax Act,Provision of Regorous Imprisonment Sholud be Introduced who Issue Form 16 to Tax Payer(After Deduction of Income Tax) but Does not File TDS Return(non Matching of TDS on 26as Form, Cases)
From Pankaj Sharma advocate,
income Tax Advisor,Pathankot(Punjab)
During the course of Assessment proceeding either u/s 143 , 148 etc made by AO and made addition without any ground due to this so many appeals are pending before Commissioner Appeal and ITAT and also Appeal Filling fees so very high at ITAT which is also to be redused and in case of addition made by Ld. AO and which was allowed by either in Ist / IInd appeal and so many favourable decission of High Court and Suprem court which was considered by Ld. AO and made addition is such situation there should be any restriction on Ld AO so he will think before making Addition and also Appeal Fees should be reduced it will reduced the case pending before Appeal
For TARC
Is it not possible to abolish Income Tax for a period of 5 years so
that the black money in circulation could be brought back to the
mainstream economy without fear of penalty and prosecution?
At least they should make masochism to provide correct form 16 A for tax payers. In my case company deduct tax and deposit tax after my complaint but show less income in form 16 A. despite it credit in my bank account. Company Accord Financial Services shows as conveyance reimbursement without any claim voucher. unfortunately ITO 49(1) TDS Laxmi Nagar Delhi Supporting tax evader firm by not taking any action against company since last 3 years