Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Arrest could be made for evasion of excise even on basis of prima facie quantification of duty

Facts
1.    Petitioner was one of the Directors of an Industrial Unit engaged in manufacture and sale of Iron & Steel Product.
2.    A search and seizure operation was carried out by the officers of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence, Jamshedpur at the factory site. Accordingly, the petitioner was summoned to give evidence and documents on several occasions.

3.    Petitioner claimed that in spite of all cooperation, he was arrested. It was submitted by him that evasion of excise duty is treated as cognizable offence only when amount exceed Rs. 1 crore. Further, arrest could be made only whenfinal quantification of the alleged evasion of duty is made by the department, which was not made in his case.

IndiGo's predatory recruitment of Air India's trained pilots is an employment issue: CCI

Mere recruitment of trained pilots of an airline by another airline will not bring about structural changes in the operations of the market. CCI rejected Air India's allegation of predatory recruitment of its trained pilots against IndiGo saying the matter is more of an employment issue Facts:

a) The informant, Air India Ltd. filed complaint against InterGlobe Aviation Limited (the ‘IndiGo’) under section19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (the ‘Act’) alleging, interalia,
contravention of the provisions of section 4 of the Act

b) It was alleged that the IndiGo has systematically indulged in predatory recruitment of trained pilots of the Air India for its proposed expansion and inducing them to breach contractual and other obligations.

c) It is further alleged that the IndiGo, by indulging in unlawful predatory recruitment practice, acquired a 52% market share in the non-metro to non-metro flight sector, making it a monopoly in that sector.

d) The Informant also stated that the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had made it
mandatory for pilots to obtain ‘No Objection Certificate’ and, accordingly, all Airlines must

ensure that the pilots hired by them have to serve the required six month notice period however, the IndiGo continued to disregard this direction of DGCA

Monday, February 22, 2016

Investment in house property need not be sourced from capital gains only for availing of sec. 54F relief

Section 54F does not put any restriction on source of investment in new asset. Therefore, exemption couldn’t be denied on ground that investment was made out of loan and not from sale consideration received on transfer of original capital asset.
Issue

Whether it is mandatory for availing of benefit of section 54F that investment in new asset should be entirely sourced from capital gain?

Saturday, February 20, 2016

ITAT applies Sec. 50 to determine cost of shares allotted in pursuance of demutualization of BSE

Cost of shares allotted pursuant to corporatization of BSE would be calculated as per Section 50 and not as per Section 55(2(ab) if depreciation was claimed on BSE membership. Further, indexation benefit on sale of such share would be available from the date of corporatization of BSE and not from the date of acquisition of original membership of BSE.
 
Facts
 
a) Assessee, engaged in the business of share broking, earned long-term capital gain on sale of shares of BSE Limited.
 
b) The said shares were allotted to the assessee under the scheme of corporatization of Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), in lieu of BSE membership card.
 
c) Assessee contended that the original cost of acquisition of BSE membership shall be taken as cost of acquisition of shares of BSE Ltd by virtue of Section 55(2)(ab) of the Income-tax Act (‘Act’). Further, the period of holding shall be reckoned from the date of acquisition of original membership of BSE by virtue of Explanation 1(ha) to Section 2(42A).
 
d) On the other hand, revenue contended that as the assessee was claiming depreciation on membership card of BSE, WDV of the membership card on the date of BSE shall be taken as the cost of acquisition of shares in view of the provisions of Section 50 of the Act. Further, period of holding for the indexation purposes shall also be reckoned from the date of corporatization of BSE and not from the date of acquisition of original membership of BSE by the assessee.
 
e) The stand taken by AO was affirmed by CIT(A). Aggrieved assessee filed the instant appeal before the tribunal.
 
The tribunal held in favour of revenue as under-
 
1) Section 55(2)(ab) stipulates that cost of acquisition of shares allotted pursuant to scheme of corporatization of a recognized stock exchange shall be deemed to be the cost of acquisition of original membership of the exchange.
 
2) Explanation 1(ha) to Section 2(42A) provides that in determining the period of holding of shares allotted in pursuance of the corporatization of the recognized stock exchange, there shall be included the period for which the person was a member of the recognized stock exchange immediately prior to such corporatization.
 
3) Section 50 stipulates that notwithstanding anything contained in Section 2(42A) of the Act, while computing capital gain in case of depreciable asset, the cost of acquisition of asset shall be deemed to be written down value of the block of asset as at the beginning of the previous year and actual cost of any asset falling with the block of asset acquired during the previous year. Further, the capital gain shall be deemed to arise from the transfer of short-term capital assets.
 
4) Section 50 is a special provision for computation of capital gain in case of depreciable asset. It is well-settled proposition that special provisions shall prevail on the general provisions.
 
5) As in the instant case depreciation was claimed on original membership of stock exchange, cost of acquisition of membership shall be computed as per section 50 and not as per section 55(2(ab).
 
6) Therefore, cost of acquisition of shares shall be taken as WDV of the membership card on the date of corporatization of BSE and not the original cost of membership paid by the assessee.
 
7) Further, it was held by the ITAT that as Section 50 overrules Section 2(42A), the benefit of indexation shall be available from the date of corporatization of BSE and not from the date of acquisition of original membership of BSE by the assessee. - [2016] 66 taxmann.com 258 (Mumbai - Trib.)

Thursday, February 18, 2016

Amendments proposes by MCA to Ind ASs and ASs

MCA has proposed certain amendments to Indian Accounting Standards (Ind ASs) and Accounting Standards (ASs). These are as follows:-
1. Deferment ofInd AS 115 and introduction of new Ind AS 11 & 18
By accepting the proposal of the National Advisory Committee on Accounting Standards (NACAS), MCA has proposed to defer the applicability of Ind AS 115, ‘Revenue from Contracts with Customers’ to April 1, 2018. Further, two new standards on revenue recognition (Ind AS 11 and Ind AS 18) have been proposed. Companies to which Ind AS are applicable should follow Ind AS 11 & 18 for revenue recognition until Ind AS 115 comes into force.
Apart from above, MCA has also proposed amendments to:
(i)           Ind AS 1, ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’
(ii)          Ind AS 19, ‘Employee Benefits’
(iii)         Ind AS 28, ‘Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures’
(iv)         Ind AS 34, ‘Interim Financial Reporting’
(v)          Ind AS 101, ‘First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting Standards’
(vi)         Ind AS 105, ‘Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations’
(vii)        Ind AS 107, ‘Financial Instruments: Disclosures’
(viii)       Ind AS 110, ‘Consolidated Financial Statements’ and
(ix)         Ind AS 112, ‘Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities’.

Click here for more details.

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Projected profits of subsequent years can’t be considered for working out the PLI under TNMM

Facts
a)    Assessee, an Indian Company, entered into a transaction to provide software development services and IT enabled services to its foreign AE.
b)    Assessee used Transactional Net Margin Method (TNMM) to determine ALP of such transaction. The Operating Profit to Total Cost ratio was adopted as PLI and same was calculated by taking weighted average margin of four years, being the actual figures for the current financial year plus projected figures for the coming three years.
c)    The TPO accepted the TNMM as the most appropriate method. However, the assessee's PLI computed on the basis of profit of four years including projected profit of three years, was rejected.
d)    Accordingly, adjustment was made to assessee’s ALP by considering the operating profit margin of the assessee for the current year alone, calculated on the basis of actual figures.
e)    Aggrieved by the TP adjustment made by TPO, assessee filed the instant appeal before the tribunal.
The tribunal held in favour of revenue as under-
1)    Essence of the entire transfer pricing provisions is to compare the actual profit earned by the assessee from an international transaction with the profit earned from comparable uncontrolled transactions.
2)    It is totally impermissible to substitute actual profit earned by the assessee from an international transaction with any other profit base, either by considering the actual profits for the earlier years or by taking into account the projected profits of the subsequent years, for the purposes of determining the ALP of an international transaction.
3)    Hence, assessee was not right in working out PLI under TNMM by considering projected profits of subsequent years- [2016] 66 taxmann.com 185 (Delhi - Trib.)


Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Guidance note issued on Depreciation as per Companies Act, 2013


Accounting for depreciation by Indian corporates is governed by the provision of Section 123 read with Schedule II of the Companies Act, 2013 and accounting standards, AS 6 and AS 10. To provide a practical guidance on accounting for depreciation (Schedule II) to preparers and auditors of the financial statements, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has released a guidance note on the same. Major guidance provided by the guidance note are as follows:
(i)           Depreciation should be charged on the basis of useful life. Useful life is specified in the Schedule II, but an entity may use different useful life subject to certain disclosures.

Monday, February 15, 2016

Assessee can change its claim of credit either as input or as capital goods at any stage of proceedings

Facts
1.    Assessee took CENVAT Credit on rails and other track materials, namely, sleepers, paints and crossings etc.Department denied credit on ground that same did not fall within definition of inputs, as they did not go in mainstream manufacture.
2.    Subsequently, during the appellate proceedings, assessee claimed credit of such goods as capital goods.The department argued that since ground of goods being 'capital goods' was not raised before lower authorities, same could not be raised for first time before Tribunal.

Subsidy received from AE for specific purpose can't be treated as income until it is spent

Facts:
1)    Assessee was a wholly owned subsidiary of Canon Singapore Pvt. Ltd (hereafter ‘CSPL’). It was engaged in purchase and resale of 'Canon' products for its holding company ‘CSPL’ in India.
2)    Assessing Officer (AO) made certain additions to the income of assessee which reflected unutilised subsidy received by assessee from its holding company.
3)    AO observed that the subsidies received by the assessee become its property notwithstanding that the same had not been spent for the purposes for which they were received.
4)    On appeal, tribunal reversed the observation taken by AO; aggrieved-revenue filed instant appeal before the High Court.

MCA issues draft format for financial statements in line with Ind AS

On 9th February, 2016, Ministry of Corporate Affairs issued draft format for financial statements (Revised Schedule III) in line with Indian Accounting Standards (Ind AS). The said format, if approved, shall be applicable on companies who are applying Ind AS voluntarily or  shall apply mandatorily w.e.f 1st Aril 2016 or 1st April, 2017, as the case may be which is specified in Companies (Indian Accounting Standards) Rules, 2015.

Proposed revised Schedule III is similar to existing Schedule III of the Companies Act, 2013 subject to some differences. The major differences are as follows: