Connect us       New User?     Subscribe Now
Confirm your Email ID for Updates
02.01.2016 - Voice of CA presents - Updates
Saturday, January 2, 2016

I. CBDT Updates    

  1. CBDT Cir.No. 25: ​Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) wherein additions/disallowances made under normal provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 but tax levied under MAT provisions u/s 115JB/115JC, for cases prior to A.Y. 2016-17  (Click for detail)
  2. CBDT Cir.No. 24: Recording of satisfaction note u/s 158BD/153C of the Act  (Click for detail)
  3. CBDT releases new guidance note on implementation of Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). this Guidance Note has been updated on 31st December 2015  (Click for detail)
  4. CBDT: All assessees mandatorily required to furnish ITR electronically shall henceforth be required to file the first appeal before CIT(Appeal) electronically  (Click for detail)
  5. CBDT advises tax deductors to validate lower rate TDS certificates from TRACES and then refer the 10 digit number in their TDS returns  (Click for detail)
II.  Direct Taxes Case Laws: 

1.  DCIT Vs. M/s AL Logistics P. Ltd, I.T.A.No. 1412/Mds/2015, Date of Pronouncement: 16.12.2015, ITAT - Chennai

Whether Container Freight Stations (CFSs) are for eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961?


The assessee company was a licence holder of warehousing complex for the purpose of maintaining a CFS. Assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act and same was disallowed by the Ld. AO on the ground that the facility provided by assessee can neither be defined as infrastructure facility nor can be considered to be fit as a ‘port’ or ‘inland port’ as per the provisions of the Act.

The Hon’ble ITAT followed its own decision in assessee’s own case wherein it was held that inland container depots and Container freight stations (i.e. customs area port) are ‘inland ports’ carrying out similar functions, i.e. warehousing, customs clearance, and transport of goods from its location to the seaports and vice versa by railway or by trucks in containers. Therefore, the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act.

Thus, appeal of revenue was dismissed

(Please click here for judgement)


2.  CIT Vs. Sharda Sinha, I.T.A. No. 471/2003, Date of Order: 22.12.2015, High Court of Delhi

The lump sum amount received as compensation for abrupt loss of source of Income is a Capital Receipt?


Assessee, a journalist by profession, claimed compensation received from his employer for termination of contract of employment as capital receipt. The AO denied the same and treated it as revenue receipt for the reason that the termination of contract with employer did not mean that the Assessee had lost his right of authorship in future "for all the publications in the universe".

Hon’ble High Court held that the termination of contract had injured the appellant's only source of income for the last 20 years. Further the Hon’ble High Court followed its judgement in case of Khanna and Annadhanam v. CIT [2013] 351 ITR 110 (Del) wherein it was held that when such source is unexpectedly terminated, it amounts to impairment of profit-making structure or apparatus. It is for that loss of the source of income that the compensation is being paid. The compensation was thus a substitute for the source and hence, capital in nature. The mere fact that the Assessee was free to earn through other sources would not make a difference to this position.

Thus, appeal of revenue is dismissed

(Please click here for judgement)   


 Golden Rules:

  "Luxury and lies have huge maintenance costs.
Truth and simplicity are self maintained without any cost.
Honesty does not always pays, but dishonesty always costs.
Lies have speed, but truth has stamina…"


  Thanks & Regards


Voice of CA 

« Back
Online Poll
Connect Us       New User?     Subscribe Now