Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 23 October To 29 October, 2022

Delhi High Court Dividends Received By IFFCO From OMIFCO Oman Can't Be Disallowed Under Income Tax Act: Delhi High Court Case Title: PCIT Versus IFFCO LTD The Delhi High Court has held that the dividends received by Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative (IFFCO) from Oman India Fertiliser Company S.A.O.C (OMIFCO) Oman cannot be disallowed under the Income Tax Act. Bombay High Court Subleasing Of Containers; Deemed Sale, Service Tax Not Applicable; Bombay High Court Case Title: Nayana Premji Savala versus The Union of India & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 404 The Bombay High Court has ruled that service tax would be applicable on transfer of goods only in cases where there is no "transfer of right to use" the said goods. The bench of Justices K. R. Shriram and A. S. Doctor ruled that in view of Article 366(29A)(d) of the Constitution of India, transfer of right to use goods is a deemed sale, which is subject to Sales Tax/VAT. The Court added that Article 366 (29A) of the Constitution does not distinguish between an owner or a lessor of the goods. Thus, the bench ruled that lease of goods for valuable consideration on a "transfer of right to use" basis is a deemed sale, even if the transferor is not the owner of the said goods. Madras High court In The Absence Of A Full And True Disclosure, Reassessment Is Not Barred By Limitation: Madras High Court Case Title: RKR. Gold P. Ltd Versus ACIT Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 444 The Madras High Court has held that the criminal investigation wing is separate and distinct from the assessment wing and that disclosure made before one wing will not exonerate the assessee from the requirement of making a "full and true disclosure" before the assessing officer in an assessment. Kerala High Court VAT Defaulter Not Liable To Pay Collection Charges If Opts Amnesty Scheme: Kerala High Court Case Title: B. Madhukumar Vs Commercial Tax Officer Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Ker) 540 The Kerala High Court has held that collection charges are not payable if a VAT defaulter opts for the Kerala Amnesty Scheme, 2017. The single bench of Gopinath P. has noted that the petitioner had settled the liabilities in terms of the provisions contained in the Amnesty Scheme of 2017, which was introduced by the provisions contained in the Kerala Finance Act 2017. Rajasthan High Court GSTIN Linking Cannot Be Denied Merely For Providing Information In Wrong Form: Rajasthan High Court Case Title: A.H. Marble Crafts, Through Proprietor Mohammad Afzal Vs Commissioner Tax The Rajasthan High Court has held that the Goods and Service Tax Identification Number (GSTIN) link cannot be denied merely for providing information in the wrong form. The division bench, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Kuldeep Mathur, has observed that absolute hyper-technical ground cannot be considered valid so as to deny the petitioner the opportunity to link the GSTIN of his father's firm with the new GSTIN number of the firm. ITAT Liquidated Damages Received By Shipping Company, Not Exempt Under 'Tonnage Tax Scheme': ITAT Case Title: M/s. Dredging Corporation of India Ltd. versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax The Visakhapatnam Bench of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)has ruled that liquidated damages received by a shipping company cannot be included in computation of tonnage tax and therefore, they are not exempt under the 'Tonnage Tax Scheme', as provided under Chapter XIIG of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Income Tax Exemption Eligible On Activities Undertaken For Advancement Of General Public Utility: ITAT Case Title: M/s Association of Mutual Funds in India Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the income tax exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act is eligible for activities undertaken for the advancement of general public utility. The two-member bench headed by Pramod Kumar (Vice President) and Rahul Chaudhary (Judicial Member)has observed that the activities of the appellant were directed toward the benefit of investors and potential investors, forming part of the general public and not limited to the benefit of its members. The appellant has also maintained separate accounts in respect of the activities. Contract For Extended Warranty Of Bentley Cars, Entered Into By Exclusive Dealer With Indian Customers, Does Not Constitute A Dependent Agent PE In India: ITAT Case Title: ACIT versus M/s. Exclusive Motors Pvt. Ltd. The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has ruled that contract for extended warranty of Bentley Cars, entered into by an exclusive dealer with the Indian customers, does not constitute a dependent agent PE in India. Distribution Fees Paid By Google India To Google Ireland, For Distribution Of AdWords Programme In India, ...

Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 23 October To 29 October, 2022

Mariya Paliwala

Tags