Monday, September 13, 2021

Land Mark Judgement: No section 14A disallowance if assessee had sufficient interest free own fund

 

Case Law Details

Case Name : South Indian Bank Limited Vs CIT (Supreme Court of India)

Appeal Number :

Date of Judgement/Order :

Related Assessment Year :

Land Mark Supreme Court Judgement: No disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Case Name: South Indian Bank Limited Vs CIT (Supreme Court of India)

Appeal No: Civil Appeal No. 9606 of 2011

Date of judgement/order: 09.09.2021

Court: Supreme Court of India

In the landmark judgement the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal of the South Indian Bank by settling the long drawn battle between the assessee and the department on whether proportionate disallowance of interest paid by the banks is called for under section 14A of the Income Tax Act for investments made in tax free bonds/securities which yield tax free dividend and interest of assesse Banks when assesse had sufficient interest free own fund which were more than the investments made.

The Supreme Court held that where the Assessee has mixed fund (made up partly of interest free funds and partly of interest bearing funds) and payment is made out of that mixed fund, the investment must be considered to have been made of the interest free fund, ie; in respect of payment made out of mixed fund, it is the assesse who has such right of appropriation and also the right to assert from what part the fund a particular investment is made and it is not permissible for the Revenue to make estimation of a proportionate figure.

South Indian Bank Limited are scheduled banks and in the course of their banking business, they also engage in the business of investments in bonds, securities and shares which earn the assesses, interest from such securities and bonds as also dividend income on investments in shares of companies and from units of UTI etc, which are tax free in nature.

Chapter IV of the Act, provides for the Heads of Income for computation of Total Income. In section 14, the various income are classified under salaries, Income from house property, Profits & Gains of business or profession, Capital Gains & Income from other sources. The Section 14A relates to expenditure incurred in relation to income which are not includable in Total Income and which are exempted from tax. No taxes are therefore levied on such exempted income. The Section 14A had been incorporated in the Income Tax Act to ensure that expenditure incurred in generating such tax exempted income is not allowed as a deduction while calculating total income for the concerned assessee.

Section 14A was introduced to the Income Tax Act by the Finance Act, 2001 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1962. Page 3 of 22 The new section was inserted in aftermath of judgment of this Court in the case of Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation Vs. CIT1. The said Section provided for disallowance of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income, which does not form part of their total income. As such if the assessee incurs any expenditure for earning tax free income such as interest paid for funds borrowed, for investment in any business which earns tax free income, the assessee is disentitled to deduction of such interest or other expenditure. Although the provision was introduced retrospectively from 01.04.1962, the retrospective effect was neutralized by a proviso later introduced by the Finance Act, 2002 with effect from 11.05.2001 where under, re-assessment, rectification of assessment was prohibited for any assessment year, up-to the assessment year 2000-2001, when the proviso was introduced, without making any disallowance under Section 14A. The earlier assessments were therefore permitted to attain finality. As such the disallowance under Section 14A was intended to cover pending assessments and for the assessment years commencing from 2001-2002.

It may be noted that in the present batch of appeals, we are concerned with disallowances made under Section 14A for assessment years commencing from 2001-2002 onwards or for pending assessments.

At outset it is clarified that none of the assessee banks amongst the appellants, maintained separate accounts for the investments made in bonds, securities and shares wherefrom the tax-free income is earned so that disallowances could be limited to the actual expenditure incurred by the assessee. In other words, the expenditure incurred towards interest paid on funds borrowed such as deposits utilized for investments in securities, bonds and shares which yielded the tax-free income, cannot conveniently be related to a separate account, maintained for the purpose. The situation is same so far as overheads and other administrative expenditure of the assessee.

In absence of separate accounts for investment which earned tax free income, the Assessing Officer made proportionate disallowance of interest attributable to the funds invested to earn tax free income. The assessees in these appeals had earned substantial tax-free income by way of interest from tax free bonds and dividend income which also is tax free. It is manifest that substantial Page expenditure is incurred for earning tax free income. Since actual expenditure figures are not available for making disallowance under Section 14A, the Assessing Officer worked out proportionate disallowance by referring to the average cost of deposit for the relevant year. The CIT (A) had concurred with the view taken by the Assessing Officer. 9. The ITAT in Assessee’s appeal against CIT(A) considered the absence of separate identifiable funds utilized by assessee for making investments in tax free bonds and shares but found that assessee bank is having indivisible business and considering their nature of business, the investments made in tax free bonds and in shares would therefore be in nature of stock in trade. The ITAT then noticed that assessee bank is having surplus funds and reserves from which investments can be made. Accordingly, it accepted the assessee’s case that investments were not made out of interest or cost bearing funds alone. In consequence, it was held by the ITAT that disallowance under Section 14A is not warranted, in absence of clear identity of funds.

The decision of the ITAT was reversed by the High Court by acceptance of the contentions advanced by the Revenue in their appeal and accordingly the Assessee Bank is before us to challenge the High Court’s decision which was against the assessee.

The question before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was whether Section 14A enables the Department to make disallowance on expenditure incurred for earning tax free income in cases where assessees like the present appellant, do not maintain separate accounts for the investments and other expenditures incurred for earning the tax-free income.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered pleathora of decisions including the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries (410 ITR 466), Maxopp Investments Limited vs CIT (2018) (15 SCC 5239) (SC).

The Apex court laid emphasis on the fact that the law does not require separate accounts to be maintained for the earning of exempt and non- exempt income and thus the argument of the department on these lines are brushed aside.

The Apex court further held that the cited judgments advise this Court to conclude that the proportionate disallowance of interest is not warranted, under Section 14A of Income Tax Act for investments made in tax free bonds/ securities which yield tax free dividend and interest to Assessee Banks in those situations where, interest free own funds available with the Assessee, exceeded their investments. With this conclusion, we unhesitatingly agree with the view taken by the learned ITAT favouring the assessees. The above conclusion is reached because nexus has not been established between expenditure disallowed and earning of exempt income. The respondents as earlier noted, have failed to substantiate their argument that assessee was required to maintain separate accounts. Their reliance on Honda Siel (Supra) to project such an obligation on the assessee, is already negated. The learned counsel for the revenue has failed to refer to any statutory provision which obligate the assessee to maintain separate accounts which might justify proportionate disallowance.

In the above context, the following saying of Adam Smith in his seminal work – The Wealth of Nations may aptly be quoted: “The tax which each individual is bound to pay ought to be certain and not arbitrary. The time of payment, the manner of payment, the quantity to be paid ought all to be clear and plain to the contributor and to every other person.” Echoing what was said by the 18th century economist, it needs to be observed here that in taxation regime, there is no room for presumption and nothing can be taken to be implied. The tax an individual or a corporate is required to pay, is a matter of planning for a tax payer and the Government should endeavour to keep it convenient and simple to achieve maximization of compliance. Just as the Government does not wish for avoidance of tax equally it is the responsibility of the regime to design a tax system for which a subject can budget and plan. If proper balance is achieved between these, unnecessary litigation can be avoided without compromising on generation of revenue.  

In view of the forgoing discussion, the issue framed in these appeals is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeals by the Assessees are accordingly allowed with no order on costs.

This judgement will put an end to lot of disputes revolving around Section 14A of the Act


Author Bio


Qualification: CA in Practice

Company: E.A. Patil & Associates LLP

Location: Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India



Monday, August 23, 2021

Section 148 Reassessment order passed in case of non-existent entity is void


Written Petition No 950 of 2020
Date of judgment/order: 09.04.2021
Related Assessment Year – 2012-13
Court: Bombay High Court

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has in case of writ petition filed by Teleperformance Global Services Private has held that assessment order passed against a non-existent company is void.

M/s Tecnovate Esolutions Pvt Ltd (TSPL) was registered company engaged in business of providing back office services/remote data entry services for customers in and outside India. Under order dated 11.02.2011 a scheme of amalgamation of aforesaid company with M/s Intelnet Global Services Pvt ltd, was approved with effect from 01.04.2010 and since then TSPL ceased to exist. Subsequently, M/s Intelnet Global Services Pvt Ltd amalgamated with M/s Serco BPO Pvt Ltd. Thereafter there has been change in the name with effect from 11.01.2016 from M/s Secro BPO Pvt Ltd to M/s Intelnet Global Services Pvt Ltd. There has been further change in name from Intelnet Global Services Pvt Ltd to Teleperformance Global Services Pvt Ltd (TGSPL) w.e.f 12.02.2019.

Notice u/s 148 of the Act for AY 2012-13 was issued to TSPL directing to file return of income within 30 days stating that there is reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escapement, without realising that said company was non-existent entity. In response to notice TSPL filed a letter that w.e.f 01.04.2010 TSPL has been amalgamated and since then the said company do not exist and as such there is no question of filing return of income for AY 2012-13. The then company M/s Intelnet Global Services Pvt Ltd had duly filed return of income for all the subsequent years and submitted that the above notice u/s 148 was issued on misconception and appears to be an inadvertent error. The AO without considering the reply or even the telephonic conversation passed assessment order on 31.12.2019 for AY 2012-13 under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act, in the name of TSPL computing taxable income of Rs. 14,50,95,452/-. Aggrieved by the order, the TSPL filed writ petition challenging the notice issued u/s 148 and assessment order passed u/s 144 r.w.s 147.

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has observed as under;-

The Supreme Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki (supra) had considered that income, which was subject to be charged to tax for the assessment year 2012-13 was the income of erstwhile entity prior to amalgamation. Transferee had assumed liabilities of transferor company, including that of tax. The consequence of approved scheme of amalgamation was that amalgamating company had ceased to exist and on its ceasing to exist, it cannot be regarded as a person against whom assessment proceeding can be initiated. In said case before notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 26.9.2013, the scheme of amalgamation had been approved by the high court with effect from 1.4.2012. It has been observed that assessment order passed for the assessment year 2012-13 in the name of non-existing entity is a substantive illegality and would not be procedural violation of Section 292 (b) of the Act. The Supreme Court in its aforesaid decision, has quoted an extract from its decision in Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs.CIT8. The Supreme Court has also referred to decision of Delhi high court in the case of CIT Vs. Spice Enfotainment Ltd.9and observed that in its decision Delhi high court had held that assessment order passed against non-existing company would be void. Such defect cannot be treated as procedural defect and mere participation of appellant would be of no effect as there is no estoppel against law. Such a defect cannot be cured by invoking provisions under section 292B.

The Supreme Court had also taken note of decision in Spice Entertainment (supra)was followed by Delhi high court in matters, viz. CIT Vs. Dimensions Apparels (P.) Ltd.10, CIT Vs. Micron Steels (P) Ltd.11; CIT Vs. Miscra India (P). Ltd.12 and in CIT Vs. Intel Technology India Ltd.13 Karnataka high court has held, if a statutory notice is issued in the name of nonexisting entity, entire assessment would be nullity in the eye of law.

The decision in the case of Maruti Suzuki (supra) would hold sway over present facts and circumstances”.


Author Bio


Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: E.A. Patil & Associates LLP
Location: Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

facebook sharing button Share
twitter sharing button Tweet
email sharing button 

Tuesday, July 27, 2021

43rd GST Council Meeting Held on 28th May, 2021- Key Highlights

 

43rd GST Council Meeting Held on 28th May, 2021- Key Highlights

To combat the difficulties faced by the taxpayers in the light of the second wave of COVID 19 pandemic accompanied with the gradual increase in the Black, white and yellow fungus cases, the 43rd GST Council Meeting was held on 28th May, 2021. A series of recommendations were issued through the Video meet chaired by Nirmala Sitharaman.

The same are in the nature of recommendation and not effective as yet. 

We have divided the same into parts for the ease of understanding and referral:

 1.     Relaxations in various due dates

 2.     Rationalization in late fees for filing GSTR1 and GSTR3B

 3.     Cumulative availing credit as per GSTR2A for April, May and June-2021

 4.    Simplification in furnishing the mandatory requirement of Annual return and Reconciliation statement for 2020-21

 5.     Retrospective effect for charging interest on net cash liability

 6.     Relief in GST rates in case of COVID-19 related Medical Goods

 7.     Clarification in Applicability of GST in case of certain services

 8.      Extension for time limit for completion/ compliance of any action, by any authority or by any person

 










3.   Cumulative Availing Credit as per GSTR2A for April, May, June-2021

           Present Provision 

The GST credit availed in a particular month cannot exceed 105% of the ITC reflected in GSTR2A of the respective month.

          Amended Provision for April, May-2021 (Notf.13/21-CGST dt.1st May, 21)

The ITC which shall be availed in the GSTR3B of April-2021 and May-2021 shall cumulatively not exceed 105% of the total ITC reflected in GSTR2A of April-2021 and May-2021.

         Recommended Provision for April, May, June-2021 

The ITC which shall be availed in the GSTR3B of April, May and June-2021 shall cumulatively not exceed 105% of the total ITC reflected in GSTR2A of April, May and June-2021.

   4.   Simplification in furnishing the mandatory requirement of Annual Return (GSTR9) and Reconciliation Statement (GSTR9C- Formerly known as GST Audit Report) for F.Y.2020-21


5.  Retrospective effect for Interest on Delayed Payment of Tax to be charged on Net Cash Liability

           Present Provision: 

         Through the Finance Bill, 2019 it was proposed that the interest on delayed payment of tax would be charged on Net Cash Liability i.e. the amount debited from the electronic cash ledger from the GST portal.

 However, there were deliberations if this was to be give retrospective effect or prospective effect.

           Recommended Provision: 

In the Finance Bill and also as per the recommendations, the interest on delayed payment of tax liability shall be levied on the Net Cash liability.

      6. Relief in GST rates in case of COVID-19 related Medical Goods

          Full exemption from GST has been recommended to be granted in case of items such as

          Medical oxygen 

          Oxygen Concentrators 

          Other oxygen storage and transportation equipment Certain Diagnostic markers test kits

         COVID vaccines

          Amphotericin B and other such items (list to be notified in due course) for the treatment of black fungus, even if imported on payment basis, for donating to the government or on recommendation of state authority to any relief agency up till 31st August, 2021.

 Initially IGST exemption was applicable only when the aforementioned goods were imported free of cost. This extension shall also be available till 31st Aug, 21.

 GST rate on Diethylcarbamazine (DEC) tablets has been recommended for reduction to 5% (from 12%) in order to support the LympahticFilarisis (an endemic) elimination programme being conducted in collaboration with WHO.

 Further relaxations have been recommended in case of repair value of re-imported goods such as sprinklers/ drip irrigation systems and other such components even if imported separately.

               8. Extension for time limit for completion/ compliance of any action, by any authority or by any person

                   The time limit for completion or compliance of any action, by any authority or by any person, which falls during the period from 15th April, 2021 to 29th June, 2021 is extended up to 30th June, 2021.

  

Request you to kindly go through the above and kindly note that the above provisions are yet to be notified.

                                                                                                                                                        


                                                                                                                                                            Writer: CA Komal Allug
















Monday, July 19, 2021

Recruitment and Appraisal

 

Team Composition

The firm has a large number of employees consisting of Chartered Accountants, students pursuing Chartered Accountancy course and Company Secretary, MBA and Graduate in accounting. Our services covers compliances and assurance as per the provisions of the Company Law, Income Tax Law and other laws which influence financials directly.

Team Training

EAP takes various initiatives for the training of employees which are relevant to the execution of assignments including wide areas such as recent amendments/changes in the Acts relating to direct and indirect tax, new methods/processes for execution of works, advance excel skills.M

Our training also covers guidance on handling of Valuation of companies, Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A), Consolidation of global operations as per law, Foreign exchange Management Act (FEMA) related topics. We also focus on the softs skills of employees

The training is conducted in-house and also we invite professionals having required technical knowledge. These trainings are mandatory based on the employee skill requirement.

Team Preparedness for Assignments

The employees are provided with formal training at the firm covering various subjects and their practical implementation on the assignments. In-house periodical training of employees helps them to keep pace with the changes in the curriculum. Employees work is reviewed by the managers who work closely on the assignments.

Employee Quality review

EAP has qualified Managers who plan assignments and perform quality. The firm constantly reviews its checklists to ensure the effectiveness of its processes. Internal Quality review team ensures quality adheres to the standards set. These standards are benchmarked to the best practices in the industry which includes the Accounting and auditing guidelines and standards, Risk Assessment approaches.

Employee appraisal

The annual performance appraisals of the employees are performed by the HR team and actively participated by the partners. The appraisals are scientific and based on formal procedures.

Land Mark Judgement: No section 14A disallowance if assessee had sufficient interest free own fund

  Case Law Details Case Name :  South Indian Bank Limited Vs CIT (Supreme Court of India) Appeal Number : Date of Judgement/Order : Related ...