1. P Chidambaram warns service tax evaders, says VCES a last chance  (Click for detail)
   

2. Service Tax Amnesty: FinMin to set up Panel to Review Rejected Applications  (Click for detail)
   

3. Govt. Allows Deduction of Commodity Transaction Tax (CTT) as Part of Business Income  (Click for detail)
   

4. Circular: Changes in company name having small alphabets allowed  (Click for detail)
   

5. Cyprus to Share Bank Data for Tax Purposes  (Click for detail)
   

6. Take advantage of ELSS this year - will not provide the same once the new DTC Bill takes effect  (Click for detail)

7. RBI asks urban co-operative banks to provide TDS certificate to customers on time  (Click for detail)

1.  CIT Vs. M/s. Gem Granites (Karnataka), Tax Case (Appeal) No. 504 of 2009, Date of Pronouncement: 12.11.2013, High Court of Madras

Whether penalty under section 271(1)(c ) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be levied even if the assessee has given cogent and reliable explanation in respect of concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income?

Held_No

Held that where the onus cast upon the assessee has been discharged by giving a cogent and reliable explanation, the onus shifts on the department to prove that there was concealment of particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income in case of non-agreement with the explanation of assessee. Therefore, where the onus as shifted on the department has not been discharged, penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) cannot be levied on the assessee.

(Please click here for judgment)

2.  K. Kanan Vs. ACIT, Tax Case Appeal No. 679 & 680 of 2013, Date of Pronouncement: 01.10.2013, High Court of Madras

Whether assessment of income can be made on presumptive basis even if turnover exceeds the statutory limit prescribed for section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 & Can the tribunal set aside the order of CIT(A) without considering the facts presented before the CIT(A)?

Held_No

In the present case turnover of the assessee exceeds the statutory limit of Rs. 40 Lakhs for the purpose of section 44AD but its income was assessed at presumptive basis because assessee couldn’t produce complete books of accounts and evidentiary documents. The vouchers presented were damaged, thus income was assessed at the rate of 8% of the turnover.

On appeal before the Ld CIT (A), it reduced the 8% of the turnover to 5% on basis of net profit in last year. On appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT, the relief given by the Ld CIT(A) was deleted. Further, on appeal before the Hon’ble High Court, the order passed by the CIT(A) was restored stating that they do not find any justification in the order of Tribunal which straightaway restored the assessment order without any discussion on the merits of the CIT (A) order. Further, it was held that Section 44 AD of the Act has no relevance as the turnover exceeded the prescribed limit.

(Please click here for judgment)