Railway Certificate-CENVAT Credit

CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY INDIAN RAILWAYS IS AN ELIGIBLE DOCUMENT FOR CENVAT CREDIT

 

 

Service tax on transportation of goods was effectively levied w.e.f. 1st Oct'12(though levied from 1st July'12, but was deferred till 30th Sep'12).

 

However, abatement of 70% was allowed vide N/N 26/2012-ST, hence effective rate of tax imposed was 3.708%.

 

Ministry of Railways issued a circular- TCR/1078/2011/2 ,dated 27th Jun'12 to deal with the issues arising out of the aforesaid levy & in para 4(xi) of the same, it was stated that on written request from customers, a consolidated certificate for each customer shall be issued by the authorised officer of Indian Railways(CCM/Dy. CAO) on monthly basis giving following details date-wise & rake-wise:

 

·         o Service Tax;

·         o Education Cess;

·         o Higher Education Cess; and

·         o Total Service Tax

 

 It further stated that the said certificate can be used by the customers for taking CENVAT. However, no corresponding amendment was made by Ministry of Finance in rule 9 of CENVAT Credit rules, 2004, which deals with the list of eligible documents for availment of CENVAT.·

 

 Now, vide N/N 26/2014-C.E.(N.T.), rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 has been amended· & clause (fa) has been inserted therein to include following certificate as an eligible document for the purpose of availing CENVAT:

 

"a Service Tax Certificate for Transportation of goods by Rail (herein after referred to as STTG Certificate) issued by the Indian Railways, along with the photocopies of the railway receipts mentioned in the STTG certificate".

 

Henceforth, the eligibility stated vide circular issued by Ministry of Railways has finally been brought at par with CENVAT credit rules.

Notification No. 26/2014 – Central Excise (N.T.), dated 27-Aug-2014

[TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, EXTRAORDINARY, PART II, SECTION 3,SUB-SECTION (i)]

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE)

 

Notification No. 26/2014 – Central Excise (N.T.)  New Delhi, the 27th August, 2014

 

G.S.R. (E). – In exercise of the powers conferred by section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944) and section 94 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, namely : –

 

1. (1) These rules may be called the CENVAT Credit (Eighth Amendment) Rules, 2014.

 

(2) They shall come into force from the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

 

2. In the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, in rule 9, in sub-rule (1), after clause (f), the following clause shall be inserted, namely:-

 

"(fa) a Service Tax Certificate for Transportation of goods by Rail (herein after referred to as STTG Certificate) issued by the Indian Railways, along with the photocopies of the railway receipts mentioned in the STTG certificate; or" 

 

[F. No. 267/87/2013-CX.8]

(Pankaj Jain)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

 

Note.- The principal rules were published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II,  Section 3, Sub-section (i), dated the 10th September, 2004, vide Notification No. 23/2004 –Central Excise (N.T.) dated the 10th September, 2004, vide number G.S.R. 600(E), dated the 10th September, 2004 and last amended vide Notification No. 25/2014 - Central Excise (N.T.) dated the 25th August, 2014 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 615 (E), dated the 25th August, 2014.

ICAI met CBDT chairman

ICAI had a detailed discussion today with CBDT chairman, representing for extention of ITR. The primary views he expressed was that ITR dates will not be extended. He will make changes in utility whereby date of audit report will not remain a mandatory field. Incase after audit, some changes are required, ITR is to be revised.

ICAI has requested him with detailed reasoning, to reconsider and extend dates

IT Date extension clarification required

CBDT has vide its order dated 20.08.2014 extended the due date for e-filing of Tax Audit Report to 30.11.2014 for A.Y. 2014-15. The order has nowhere mentioned about the due date for e-filing of Income tax Return (ITR). It seems due date for filing of ITR are been kept same. If the Assessee who are covered under tax audit provisions but not under transfer pricing audit provisions do not file the ITR on or before 30th September 2014, he may have the following implications:-
He may have to pay Interest U/s. 234A of the Income Tax Act,1961 on taxes outstanding.
Losses if any may not be allowed to be carried forward under the provisions of section 80 Read with section 139(3) of the Income tax Act,1961.
To claim deduction of Statutory expenses falling under section 43B, Assessee have to pay these Statutory on or before the filing of ITR or Due Date of return filing (Due Date of ROI is 30.09.2014) whichever is earlier.
Some of the deduction i.e. Under Section 10A, which requires Assessee to file his return on or before the due date specified under sub section (1) of section 139 may not be allowed to Assessee.
If Assessee not able to file his Return on or before 30.09.2014 he may not be able to revise his Return of Income.
In True Terms for Tax Professional as evident from Order there is no extension of date for Tax Audit Report as most of the professionals prepares ITR only after completion of Tax Audit Report.
CBDT Order has created lots of confusion amongst the taxpayer and tax professionals by not specifying regarding ITR and CBDT needs to immediately clarify its stand on ITR filing.

Supreme Court on Coal Blocks

Supreme Court deems all coal blocks allocated since 1993 as illegal

SC cancels all coal block allocations since 1992

 

Allocation of coal blocks done under screening committee rule and government dispensation suffers from illegality, says SC.

 

In a ruling that may come as a blow to several companies, the Supreme Court on Monday deemed all coal block allocations made between 1993 and 2009 as illegal. The court said that it would appoint a high-level committee of retired judges to identify those who will be affected by its order.

The bench will address the issue of the legal consequences of its ruling on the next hearing on September 1, 2014, when it creates a committee to identify those whose allocations will be cancelled. It also also address the route through which these allocations may be henceforward made.

The Supreme Court said, "Allocation of coal blocks done under screening committee rule and government dispensation suffers from illegality." "All allocations were done in an illegal manner and suffer from vice of arbitrariness," the court ruled.

The apex court went on to add, "No objective criteria was followed and guidelines were breached in coal block allocations." "The coal block allocation done by screening committee was not fair and transparent," it added.

 

A bench, comprising CJI RM Lodha, Madan Lokur and Kurian Joseph, said that all allocations done in all 35 meetings of the committee were ad hoc, casual and hence unfair.

Some 194 allocations were made through the screening committee and another 36 through the government dispensation route.

Amit Anand Tiwari, a lawyer for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) that is also investigating illegalities in coal mine allocations, said wrongful grant of blocks had cost the public exchequer $4.8 billion.

Agriculture exemption

IT : Assessee could be allowed exemption under section 10(37), even if agricultural land was not cultivated by assessee himself but through hired labourer or other family member

Updated Schema

Revised Form 3CA-3CD & Form 3CB-3CD along with updated Schema is now available for e-Filing.

Madhya Pradesh High Court on Sec 234E

S. 234E: High Court grants ad-interim stay against operation of notices levying fee for failure to file TDS statement
S. 234E of the Income-tax Act, 1961 inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 provides for levy of a fee of Rs. 200/- for each day's delay in filing the statement of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) or Tax Collected at Source (TCS). A Writ Petition to challenge the validity of s. 234E has been filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court. HELD by the High Court by an ad-interim order:

Issue notice to the respondents on interim relief. Additionally issue notice to Attorney General of India as the validity of the Central enactment is put in issue.
By way of ad interim relief, we direct the respondents not to take coercive action against the petitioner with regard to the subject matter referred to in the impugned Annexures P/2 to P/5. We are inclined to grant this order ex parte keeping in mind the orders passed by other High Courts (High Court of Kerala, High Court of Karnataka, High Court of Rajasthan, Bombay High Court and High Court of Orissa).

 

Due date of filing 44AB Audit Report extended till 30/11/2014

TDS credit has to be given to the payee despite 26AS mismatch

Upon issue of Form 16A TDS certificate, TDS credit has to be given to the payee even if there is Form 26AS mismatch or deductor is at fault for non-deposit of TDS with Govt.

U/s 204, the liability to deduct TDS is on the employer / payer. U/s 205, when tax is deductible at source, the assessee shall not be called upon to pay tax himself to the extent to which tax has been deducted from that income. This means that the assessee / deductee is entitled to credit of such amount of TDS. Even if the deductor, after deducting the TDS, does not deposit the sum with the department, the department has to recover the said amount from the deductor and cannot deny credit to the deductee (Om Prakas Gattani 242 ITR 638 (Gau) &Yashpal Sahni 293 ITR 539 (Bom) followed)

Sumit Devendra Rajani vs. ACIT (Gujarat High Court)

Amendment to LRS

.

Date: Aug 11, 2014

Liberalised Remittance Scheme for resident individuals-clarification (Corrected)

RBI/2014-15/171 A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 19 August 11, 2014 To     All Category - I Authorised Dealer Banks Madam / Sir, Liberalised Remittance Scheme for resident individuals-clarification Attention of Authorised Dealer Category-I (AD Category-I) banks is invited to A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 5 dated July 17, 2014, in terms of which it was clarified that the Scheme can also be used for acquisition of immovable property outside India. 2. In the light of the above clarification, the requirement of post facto reporting stipulated in terms of A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No.32 dated September 04, 2013, (Sr. no. 4 of Annexure to the Circular) stands withdrawn. 3. The directions contained in this Circular have been issued under Section 10 (4) and 11 (1) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999) and are without prejudice to permissions/approvals, if any, required under any other law. Yours faithfully, (C. D. Srinivasan) Chief General Manage

Company Law Settlement Scheme (CLSS), 2014

Announcement of Company Law Settlement Scheme (CLSS), 2014 vide General Circular No. 34/2014 dated 12th August 2014 One Time Opportunity for Defaulting Companies and Its Directors

Revision in Statutory fee for filing application for Registration of Trademark

Revision in Statutory fee for filing application for Registration of Trademark

The "Ministry of Commerce, Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion" vide notification dated 1st August, 2014 has revised the Statutory Fee payable to the Trademark Registrar on making an application for registration of a Trademark (Form TM-1) to Rs. 4,000/- from existing fee of Rs. 3,500/- for every Application in Single Class.

Similarly Statutory Fee for  "Application for the expedited examination under rule 38(1) for the registration of a trade mark " has been revised to 20,000/- from existing fee of Rs. 12,500/- for every Application in Single Class.

Representation made by ICAI with respect to new formats of Form No.3CA/3CB and 3CD

Representation made by ICAI with respect to new formats of Form No.3CA/3CB and 3CD. - (11-08-2014)
The new formats of tax audit reports namely Form No.3CA, 3CB and 3CD have been notified through Notification no. 33/2014 on 25/7/2014 with immediate effect. With regard to the same, certain genuine concerns were raised by the members, which, ICAI has, through a representation dated 07.08.2014, brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Finance Minister, Revenue Secretary, and Chairman CBDT for appropriate action at their end. Also, certain preliminary observations on the new forms have been shared with them.

For the reasons mentioned in detail in the representation and summarized below, ICAI has suggested:

The new formats of tax audit reports be made effective from the Assessment Year 2015-16 and not Assessment Year 2014-15. Alternatively, the due date for furnishing tax audit reports for the Assessment Year 2014-15 may be extended to 30th November, 2014

It has also been suggested that appropriate clarification be issued with regard to the position of the tax audit reports e-filed during 01.04.2014 to 24.07.2014 relating to Assessment Year 2014-15.

Reasons given in brief:

a) The Internationally accepted Standard on Auditing-700 has not been considered.
b) The audit of 50% of the taxpayers like listed companies, PSUs, Banks, Insurance Companies have already been completed and the financial statements are published. Only, the audit reports are pending for uploading in the e-filing portal.
c) The notification has been issued just two months before the last date of furnishing tax audit report and the schema for the same is not yet made available. This will cause undue hardship to both the taxpayer and the auditors.

Direct Taxes Committee, ICAI

HC prohibits Non advocates from appearing before VAT Authorities

HC prohibits Non advocates from appearing before VAT Authorities

CA Sandeep Kanoi

Allahabad High Court in the case of Tax Lawyers Association Lko. Vs. State Of U.P. as a Interim Measure held that no person whosoever, may be permitted to advertise in the Newspaper or any leaflet, inviting assesses for the purpose of filing of return or arguing before the authority under the VAT Act. Any person, who is not a registered advocate, shall not be permitted to appear before the Authority under the VAT Act. Judgment is a blow for Professionals like Chartered Accountant, Company Secretaries, Cost Accountants etc. who are working in the filed of UP VAT.

Brief Details of the case is as follows :-

Petitioners are aggrieved by the provisions contained in Rule 73 read with Rule 79(2)(f) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Rules 2008 (for short VAT Rules) which permits outsiders to practice in the field of Law before the VAT Authorities under the VAT Act. Learned Senior Counsel invited our attention towards Section 33 of the Advocates Act 1961 which provides that only Advocates are entitled to practice before any Court or authority. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that impugned Rule is ultra vires to the Constitution in view of the provision contained in the Advocates Act 1961 since under the garb of the impugned Rule, outsiders have been permitted to appear before the authorities under the VAT Act to practice in the field of Law. Attention has been invited by learned Senior Counsel to certain leaflets which seem to be advertisement by certain persons who are not registered Advocates inviting assesses with regard to filing of return on payment of Rs.400/- and odd.

Submission is that under the garb of said Rule, persons who are not skilled lawyer or have no knowledge in the field of Law, are appearing before the authority under the VAT Act, are spoiling academic atmosphere of the profession.

Argument advanced by learned Senior Counsel, as well as pleadings on record, require consideration.

Accordingly, writ petition is admitted.

Learned Chief Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondents. Let notice be issued to Advocate General of the State of U.P. and counter affidavit be filed within a period of three weeks. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within one week thereafter. In case counter affidavit is not filed, the Court may proceed further and pass order in the matter keeping in view the arguments advanced by learned Senior Counsel.

List immediately after four weeks for peremptory hearing.

In the meantime, as an interim measure, we direct the respondents that no person whosoever, may be permitted to advertise in the Newspaper or any leaflet, inviting assesses for the purpose of filing of return or arguing before the authority under the VAT Act. Any person, who is not a registered advocate, shall not be permitted to appear before the Authority under the VAT Act.

Source – Tax Lawyers Association Lko. Throu General Secy. & Anr. Vs. State Of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Tax & Registration U.P. Lko. & Ors (Allahabad High Court), MISC. BENCH No. – 7116 of 2014, Order Date :- 6.8.2014

NO SERVICE TAX AUDIT BY DEPARTMENT OR CAG

NO SERVICE TAX AUDIT BY DEPARTMENT OR CAG

 

In an Important judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Travelite (India) Vs. Union of India & Ors. [W.P. (C) 3774/2013, C.M. No. 7065/2013] on the Service Tax Audit issue it is held that :

 

Rule 5A(2) of the Service tax Rules is ultra vires the provisions of the Finance Act:

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that Rules only give effect to statute’s provisions and intent and cannot be used to create substantive rights, obligations or liabilities that are not within the contemplation of the statute. Further, the only audit within the Statute is as mentioned under Section 72A of the Finance Act, i.e. a Special Audit, when only certain circumstances are fulfilled. The Parliament thus had a clear intention to provide for only a special audit. Accordingly, Rule 5A(2) of the Service Tax Rules cannot provide for a general audit of the assessee and is ultra vires the rule making power conferred under Section 94(1) of the Finance Act.

Further, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court also held that the Service Tax Audit Manual is merely an instrument of instructions for the service tax authorities and do not have any statutory force. Therefore, Rule 5A(2) of the Service Tax Rules cannot be justified on the basis of the Service Tax Audit Manual.

 

The Instruction regarding Audit by Department is contrary to the Statue:

Further, it was held that the Instruction is also ultra vires the Finance Act since executive instructions without statutory force cannot override the law. Consequently, any notice, circular, guideline etc., contrary to statutory laws cannot be enforced since the parent statute in this regard, the Finance Act itself does not authorise a general audit of the type envisioned by the impugned Rule 5A(2) of the Service Tax Rules, and furthermore only stipulates that a Special Audit can be undertaken if the circumstances outlined in Section 72A of the Finance Act are fulfilled. The Hon’ble High Delhi Court finds that the Instruction is not only an attempt to widen the scope of the law impermissibly but also is patently contrary to the Statute. The Instruction, to the extent it provides clarifications on Rule 5A(2) of the Service Tax Rules, pertaining to Service Tax audit, is quashed.

 

It will also not be out of place to mention that recently, the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of ACL Education Centre Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Union of India [2014-TIOL-120-HC-ALL-ST] has held that the Audit under service tax is to be conducted by Chartered Accountants/ Cost Accountants only and not by officers of the Department.

Further the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of SKP Securities Ltd. Vs. DD (RA-IDT) & Ors. [2013-TIOL-38-HC-KOL-ST] has held that no audit of private assessee can be undertaken by CAG.
CA. Vinay Mittal, Ghaziabad

CA Final results May 2014

Group	No. of Candidates appeared	No. of candidates passed	Pass %	Pass % in Nov 13
Both Group	42533	3100	7.29%	3.11%
Group- I	65792	8884	13.50%	5.67%
Group-II	65706	7004	10.66%	7.35%

RBI Monetary Policy-2014-15

Third Bi-Monthly Monetary Policy Statement, 2014-15

By Dr. Raghuram G Rajan, Governor Monetary and Liquidity Measures On the basis of an assessment of the current and evolving macroeconomic situation, it has been decided to: keep the policy repo rate under the liquidity adjustment facility (LAF) unchanged at 8.0 per cent; keep the cash reserve ratio (CRR) of scheduled banks unchanged at 4.0 per cent of net demand and time liabilities (NDTL); reduce the statutory liquidity ratio (SLR) of scheduled commercial banks by 50 basis points from 22.5 per cent to 22.0 per cent of their NDTL with effect from the fortnight beginning August 9, 2014; and continue to provide liquidity under overnight repos at 0.25 per cent of bank-wise NDTL  and liquidity under 7-day and 14-day term repos of up to 0.75 per cent of NDTL of the banking system. Consequently, the reverse repo rate under the LAF will remain unchanged at 7.0 per cent, and the marginal standing facility (MSF) rate and the Bank Rate at 9.0 per cent.

CBDT Circular on SEZ

SEZ tax holiday setback continues

By Ameya Kunte

 

 

It is learnt that CBDT has recently issued a circular which is likely to have a huge negative impact on tax holiday enjoyed by SEZ units in IT sector. The circular states that transfer of people from an existing-unit to a new SEZ unit in the first year of business will not be treated as splitting up or reconstruction of an existing business, provided such transfer does not exceed 20% of total technical manpower headcount actually engaged in software development in SEZ unit. This clarification will not only affect new SEZ unit set-ups, but will also impact tax holiday claims of past years resulting into a litigation.

 
SEZ which are considered as growth engines of the economy have suffered tax blows in the recent past. SEZs that were promised a complete tax holiday, have been hit with Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT). Contrary to the expectations of relief from Budget 2014, the Finance Minister defended MAT on SEZ citing that "removal of MAT from SEZ developers and units had no justification vis-à-vis other sectors of economy which were liable to pay MAT". FM has also stated that MAT paid is available as credit. However, almost 20% cash outflow on MAT does have significant negative impact on SEZ project's IRR. In 2014 Budget, the Government also clarified that SEZ claiming investment-linked tax benefit (u/s Sec 35AD) will not be eligible for tax holiday u/s 10AA and vice-versa, thus further curtailing tax incentive available to SEZ.
 
I think Government ought to clarify policy on SEZ scheme on an overall basis & tax is an integral part of it. Else, tax set-backs will surely continue to reduce SEZ attractiveness and drive investors out of SEZ scheme.

MEF Date extended

MEF Date of online filing for 2014-15 extended to 10/8/14 & for hard copy of acknowledgement upto 20/8/14

No Harassment Or High-Handed Behaviour With Taxpayers: New CBDT Chief

No Harassment Or High-Handed Behaviour With Taxpayers: New CBDT Chief

Shri. K. V. Chowdary, the newly appointed Chairman of the CBDT, has addressed a letter dated 01.08.2014 to the income-tax department in which he has pointed out that one of the immediate challenging task is reaching the 'not so easy' target for Revenue collection without undue harassment and high handedness. He has emphasized that the department has to improve its image and become a "friendly, professional, non adversarial and competent organization focused on Revenue collection, tax payers services and ensuring strict compliance with direct tax laws".

Mr. Chowdary has emphasized that one of the issues that requires "immediate and earnest attention" is quicker and reasonable resolution of the requests/ grievances of the taxpayers, early resolution of disputes, effective assessments analyzing all the facts and avoiding high pitched assessments, promotion of compliance, sending strong message by dealing with tax evasion and tax frauds firmly effectively and quickly, widening the tax base, etc.