ॐ असतो मा सद्गमय
However, if there were multiple bogus transactions of similar kind, it would lead to conclusion that activities of trust were not genuine and, in such a case, registration granted to it could be cancelled under section 12AA(3)
Jagannath Gupta Family Trust[2017] 86 taxmann.com 104 (Calcutta) SEPTEMBER 18, 2017
Anil Bishnoi[2017] 86 taxmann.com 217 (Chandigarh – Trib.) SEPTEMBER 27, 2017
If someone has sold a property, consequently the other person has purchased the said property. If the transfer of property is complete as per the definition of transfer u/s 2(47) of the Act, the assessee is made labile to pay tax on the capital gains earned by him, on the same analogy, the transfer is also complete in favour of the purchaser also. The provisions cannot be interpreted in a manner to say that transfer vis-a-vis selling is complete but vis-a-vis purchase is not complete in respect of same transaction. In view of this, the word ‘Purchase’ cannot be interpreted and detached from the definition of word ‘transfer’ as given u/s 2(47) of the Act. When the transfer takes effect as per the provisions of section 2(47) of the Act, if a liability to pay tax arise in the case of the seller, the consequent right to get deduction on the purchase of property accrues in favour of the purchaser, if he otherwise is so eligible to claim it as per the relevant provisions of the Act.
For the claim of deduction u/s 54 of the Act, the registration of sale deed is not necessary. It is enough if the assessee has paid the consideration, acquired the possession with full rights and has fulfilled other requirements of the provisions of the Act:-
| 1. | Sh. Sanjeev Lal etc. v. CIT 269 CTR 001(SC) 2014 | |
| 2. | CIT v. T.N. Aravinda Reddy [1979] 12 CTR 0423 (SC) | |
| 3. | CIT v. K. Jelani Basha [2002] 256 ITR 0282 (Madras) | |
| 4. | CIT v. Ram Gopal [2015] 372 ITR 498 (Delhi) | |
| 5. | Balraj v. CIT [2002] 254 ITR 22 (Delhi) | |
| 6. | CIT v. R.L. Sood [2000] 245 ITR 727 (Delhi) | |
| 7. | CIT v. Dr Laxmichand Narpal Nagda, [1995] 211 ITR 804 (Bom.) | |
| 8. | CIT v Mrs. Shahzada Begum, [1988]73 CTR 0229 (A.P.) | |
| 9. | S. Dabir Singh, Jalandhar v. Department of Income Tax, ITA No. 27 (Asr.)/2015 |
Dr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital[2017] 86 taxmann.com 107 (Mumbai – Trib.) SEPTEMBER 8, 2017
Chandigarh ITAT in the case of IVY Health Life Sciences where the facts are almost identical to the case of the appellant, in that case also, the professional doctors were paid on the basis of fees received from the patients. Their remuneration was not fixed and they were also free to render services to the patients as they considered appropriate in terms of time or duration. Such professional doctors were also not entitled to PF, ESI, LTC and any other perquisites or retirement benefits. In these circumstances therefore, it was held by Hon’ble Chandigarh ITAT that there was no employer and employee relationship between the assessee and the professional doctors. Hence the assessee had rightly deducted tax at source under section 194J from the payments made to the professional doctors
The word ‘scrap’ itself in ordinary parlance presupposes manufacture, processing or industrial activity.
In running a medical hospital question of generation of scrap is inconceivable. Therefore provisions of s.206C of the Act, ‘Prima Facie’ are not applicable to the assessee.
Dr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital[2017] 86 taxmann.com 107 (Mumbai – Trib.) SEPTEMBER 8, 2017
Dr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital[2017] 86 taxmann.com 107 (Mumbai – Trib.) SEPTEMBER 8, 2017
AMC was necessary to keep medical equipments and other hospital equipments in good working condition and this process was normally carried out by skilled mechanics and not any qualified technician. Through these AMCs, the assessee was carrying out routine normal maintenance which was covered by the provisions of section 195C and these were not technical services covered under section 194J.
As per Q. No. 29 of CBDT Circular No 7 dated 8-8-1995, Routine, normal maintenance contracts which includes supply o spares will be covered tinder Section 194C. However, where technical services are rendered, the provision of Section 1 94J will apply in regard to the deduction at source.
Held in Ultra Entertainment Solutions Ltd where in the election was regarding the nature of payments made by the assessee to another person , who was engaged by the assessee is to carry out all operations connected with the selling of online lottery tickets on behalf of the assesse, that tax is deductible u/s 194J
ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd. vs. ITO, 3 SOT 468 (Ahd), wherein it was held that the payments made by the assessee company to Gujarat Electricity Board for entire operation and maintenance 6r’Power plant under a comprehensive contract could not be treated as payment “fees for professional services as contemplated in section 194J but were covered by section 194C of the Act”.
Decision dated 30.09.2011 in ITA Nos. 3059 to 3061 & 3081/Ahd./2009 of Ahmedabad Tribunal in the case of Nuclear Power Corporation Ltd, it has been held that repairs and annual maintenance of computers do not involve services of technical nature so as to be assessable as “fees for technical services” u/s 9(1)(vii) of the Act and hence the assessee was required to deduct TDS under Section 194C of the Act and not under Section 194J of the Act.
Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Skycell Communications Ltd. 251 ITR 53 (where it was held that the installation and operation of sophisticated equipments with a view to earn income by allowing customers to avail of the benefit of the user of such equipment does not result in the provision of technical service to the customer for a fee)
Similar decisions by the Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Dy. CIT v. Asian Heart Institute & Research Centre (P.) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 250
Deemed Exports declared u/s 147 of CGST by Notification 48/2017 dated 18-10-2017
Further as per Notification 47/2017-CT dated 18-10-2017, substituting the 3rd proviso to Rule 89, application for refund in deemed exports can be filed by :
(a) the recipient of deemed export supplies; or
(b) the supplier of deemed export supplies in cases where the recipient does not avail of input tax credit on such supplies and furnishes an undertaking to the effect that the supplier may claim the refund”;
As per old rule application for refund could be filed by recipient only in case of deemed exports.
The tax payers is well within his rights to seek & inspect the warrant of authorisation, confirm the identities of authorized Income Tax Authorities mentioned on the warrant. The assessee can seek the telephone numbers of immediate supervisory officers of the search/survey party for the purpose of verification of genuineness.
In case, any doubts still persists then the Income Tax Department can be contacted on the following number 9013850099 for the specified purpose of confirmation of identities of officers/officials working in the Delhi region.
A ‘new return filer’ for this purpose is defined as a person who has not filed return in the previous three Financial Years (2014-15 to 2016-17) but has filed return in the current financial year.
Region wise targets are as under:
:
| Region | Target for new return filers for FY 2017-18 | Region | Target for new return filers for FY 2017-18 |
| JAIPUR | 580261 | ||
| AHMEDABAD | 941123 | KANPUR | 616725 |
| BANGALORE | 876846 | KOCHI | 362156 |
| BHOPAL | 620925 | KOLKATA | 697685 |
| BHUBHNESWAR | 234850 | LUCKNOW | 620651 |
| CHANDIGARH | 1041948 | MUMBAI | 740741 |
| CHENNAI | 1047702 | NAGPUR | 211922 |
| DELHI | 727367 | PATNA | 502132 |
| GUWAHATI | 254948 | PUNE | 1182532 |
| HYDERABAD | 1239486 | Total | 12500000 |