I.  Useful Contrubitions: 

1. [Contribution by Respected CA Bimal Jain Ji and contributor is available at bimaljain@hotmail.com ]

An article - "Whether the Cenvat Credit is available on the strength of Xerox Copy of Bill of Entry?"

(Click here for detail)

2. [Contribution by CA Naveen Garg and contributor is available at Naveen.Garg@nextgenknowledge.com ]

News alert for XBRL filing

(Click here for detail)

 II.  Whats New:

1. CBEC extends the date of submission of the service tax return for the period April 2012 to June 2012, from 25th October, 2012 to 25thNovember,2012 (Click for detail)     

2. Circular on Salary Income  (Click for detail) 
   

3. Penalty justified even if defaulter agrees to pay up: Tribunal  (Click for detail) 
   

4. FEMA Cir. No. 44: Banks can grant loan against NR (External) Rupee Account and Foreign Currency Non-resident Bank Deposits  (Click for detail) 
   

5. National Electronic Funds Transfer (NEFT) – Requirement of Indian Financial System Code (IFSC) in transactions  (Click for detail) 
   

6. ICAI Invites Suggestions on Direct and Indirect Taxes for Pre-Budget Memorandum, 2013  (Click for detail)

   III.  Useful Case Laws: 

1.  Education Australia Limited India Vs. DDIT, I.T.A No. 5124/Del/10, Dated: 18-05-2012, ITAT- Delhi

No addition can be made on account of Expenses incurred by liaison office/representatives in India on behalf of Australian institutions.

The finding of the AO is that expenditure incurred by the head office will have to be allocated to the Indian offices. There has been no allocation made by the assessee. The income is being offered for tax on cost plus basis, therefore, the general and administrative expenditure incurred by the head office for running India offices has to be considered for working out the cost base. The fact of the matter is that the Indian offices have not incurred any expenditure. If any income accrues on account of expenditure incurred by the head office, it will be the income of the head office and not Indian offices. At the same time, if any expenditure is attributed to Indian offices deduction of the expenditure will have to be allowed. Thus seen from any angle the revenue does not have any case in this matter.

(Please click here for judgment) 

2.  Sri Syed Aslam Hashmi Vs. ITO, I.T.A. Nos.1313/Bang/2010 & 1076/Bang/2012, Date of Pronouncement: 28.09.2012, ITAT – Bangalore

NRI (purchaser) was liable to deduct tax in accordance with section 195 on the sale consideration before making payment.

As regards assessee's contention in respect of wrong quantification of tax i.e. applying rate on the entire sale consideration of Rs. 61,62,500 and not on the capital gain of Rs. 9,29,753.

Held that section 195(1) required the assessee to deduct tax on entire sale consideration. If theassessee considered otherwise, section 195(2) required him to make an application to the AO under section 197 read with section 195(2) to determine the amount chargeable for applying the rate but the assessee had failed to do so. Thus, the finding that quantification of the TDS under section 195 made at Rs. 13,82,870 being 20.4% of entire sale consideration was correct.

As regards assessee's contention that demand could not be quantified under section 201(1) since the said provision only deemed an assessee to be in default, it was to be held that section 201 clearly indicates that it is consequential and gets activated the moment an assessee liable to deduct tax under the Act fails to either deduct or pay the same at source.

(Please click here for judgment) 
 

  Golden Rules:

"Expectation is a gift not a liability because
when people expect something from you, 
it means you have given them reasons to believe in you"

  Thanks & Regards

  Team - Voice of CA