Connect us       New User?     Subscribe Now
Confirm your Email ID for Updates
17.05.2014 - Voice of CA presents - Updates
Saturday, May 17, 2014

  I. Today's Headlines:    

  1. ITR 1 (SAHAJ) , ITR 4S (SUGAM) & ITR 2 for AY 2014-15 are available for e-Filing
  2. RBI notifies External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) from Foreign Equity Holder - Simplification of Procedure  (Click for detail )
  3. Government hikes import tariff value on Gold, Silver (Click for detail )
  4. RBI to launch plastic notes next year: Raghuram Rajan (Click for detail )
  5. Rupee at 11-month High, RBI Intervention seen (Click for detail )
II. Useful Articles:

1. [Contribution by CA. Bimal Jain and contributor is available at]

SC explains distinction between "Contract for Sale" and "Works Contract"

(Please click here)


2. [Contribution by CA Madhukar Hiregange, Former CC Member and contributor is available at ]

Branch/ Stock Transfer under Local VAT/ CST

(Please click here)

III.  Direct Tax Case laws:

1.   CIT vs Ms Bharat Bijlee Ltd, ITA No. 2153 of 2011, Date of Order: 09.05.2014, High Court of Bombay

Section 50B r.w.s. 2(42C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Whether the provisions of section 50B of the Act are also applicable in case of transfer of unit is by way of exchange.


The provisions of slump sale are applicable where the transfer is by way of “sale”. In the instant case, assessee has transferred Lift Division to other Company under the scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by the High Court and the other Company issued preference shares in consideration of the same. The AO made the addition by assuming the value of the shares is the price or monetary consideration for the transfer. However, the assessee contented that since as there was no price in money which was paid and received merely because there was quantification when preference shares were issued, does not mean that monetary consideration was determined. Thus, the value of the shares could not have been taken as the basis.

After analyzing the provisions of the statute, the Hon’ble High Court has held that the applicability of Section 50B would have to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case. If the transfer is by way of sale, only then it could be termed as a slump sale and then Section 50B would be attracted.

Case referred: CIT vs Motors & General Stores (P) Ltd. (1967) Vol.66 ITR 692, SRIE Infrastructure Finance Ltd, W.P. (Civil) No.1592 of 2012.

(Please click here for judgment )

2.  CIT vs Kamlaben Sureshchandra Bhatti, Tax Appeal No. 70 of 2014, Date of Order: 17.02.2014, High Court of Gujarat

There is no breach of Rule 46A when interest of revenue was safeguarded by calling for remand report and permitting the AO to comment on such additional evidence.

In the instant case, the notice of hearing issued by the AO was received by the assessee on the date of hearing itself and thus could not produce necessary evidence on such date. When subsequently, assessee attended the office of the AO with necessary evidence, he learnt that the order of assessment was already passed. The CIT (A) permitted additional evidence to be produced before him after considered the reason and also called remand report from the Ld. AO.

Held that when the interest of the Revenue is safeguarded by calling the remand report and permitting the Assessing Officer to comment on such additional evidence. Then the admission of additional evidence could not be stated to be in breach of the requirement of Rule 46A.

(Please click here for judgment )


 Golden Rule:

  If you want to be Successful

you must Respect one Rule

'Never lie to Yourself'


Thanks & Regards


Voice of CA 

« Back
Online Poll
Connect Us       New User?     Subscribe Now