Blog Archives

Tribunal cannot Question validity of Act, Rules, Regulations & Notifications

CC, Hyderabad- Customs Vs Surya Telecom Pvt Ltd (CESTAT Hyderabad) As a creation of law, the Tribunal cannot go beyond the law itself. The validity of the Act, Rules, Regulations and Notifications cannot be questioned or modified by the Tribunal. Only the High Courts and Supreme Court which examine the constitutionality of the laws can do so. Unless […]

Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2016

For the purposes of this clause, the reconstruction or splitting up of a company, which ceased to be a public sector company as a result of transfer of its shares by the Central Government, into separate companies, shall be deemed to be a demerger, if such reconstruction or splitting up has been made to give effect to any condition attached to the said transfer of shares and also fulfils such other conditions as may be notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette

Reg. Export of Gems / Jewelry products manufactured from gold

The RBI Circulars from 22.07.2013 to 14.02.2013 had not provided provisions to claim replenishment of gold in respect of export of Gems and jewellery products manufactured from gold, by participation in the exhibitions abroad or claiming gold in cases where gold was booked by payment of minimum 20% with Nominated Agency, subject to adjustment at time of actual sale.

Taxation Laws Amendment Bill, 2016 as Intorduced in Loksabha

With a view to facilitate the splitting up or the reconstruction of erstwhile public sector companies and to give effect to the conditions attached to the transfer of shares by the Government, there is a need to bring these types of splitting up or the reconstruction within the scope of definition of the term demerger.

Direct / Indirect Tax Collections up to July, 2016

Indirect Tax Collections up to July, 2016 indicate net revenue collections of Rs.2,71,719 crore as compared to Rs.209217 crore in the corresponding period last year and thereby registering an increase of 29.9% over the corresponding period; 34.9% of the Budget Estimates of indirect taxes for FY 2016-17 achieved till July 2016.

Growth in Direct/Indirect tax collection of 1st quarter of 2016-17

The direct tax collections upto June, 2016 indicate net revenue collection of Rs.1.24 lakh crore which is a growth of 24.79% over the corresponding period last year. The main reason for this increase is the change in the requirements for advance tax payment even in respect of individuals which has been made in the last year’s Budget.

Major Take Aways from Annual Conference of Tax Administrators

The take-aways from the Conference on the CBEC side are:- 1. Need for preparation for roll-out of GST with focus on IT and increased capacity building through training of officers. 2. Need to focus on Dispute Resolution: Identify 20 topmost litigated issues and examine from policy perspective whether any intervention is required.

Gold award for Income Tax Department under National Award on E-Governance 2014-15

The Project marks a major step in ensuring TDS compliance through the processing of TDS returns and comprehensive data processing of TDS statements using technology driven end-to-end processes. At present 15 Lakh deductors and 2.5 crore tax payers are using various e-enabled online services through the CPC (TDS).

Deferred Tax Liability on Special Reserve created under Section 36(1) (viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

RBI/2013-14/412 DBOD. No.BP.BC.77/21.04.018/2013-14 December 20, 2013 The Chairmen and Managing Directors / Chief Executive Officers of all Commercial Banks (excluding Regional Rural Banks) Dear Sir, Deferred Tax Liability on Special Reserve created under Section 36(1) (viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Please refer to our mailbox clarification dated November 6, 2009 with respect to [...]

The post Deferred Tax Liability on Special Reserve created under Section 36(1) (viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 .

Timely Issue of TDS Certificate to Customers

RBI/2013-14/401 UBD.CO.BPD.(PCB).Cir.No. 41/12.05.001/2013-14 December 5, 2013 To, The Chief Executive Officer All Urban Co-operative Banks Dear Sir / Madam, Timely Issue of TDS Certificate to Customers It has been brought to our notice that some banks are not providing TDS Certificate in Form 16A to their customers in time, causing inconvenience to customers in filing [...]

The post Timely Issue of TDS Certificate to Customers .

Timely Issue of TDS Certificate to Customers

RBI/2013-14/361 DBOD.No.Leg.BC.65/09.07.005/2013-14 November 6, 2013 All Scheduled Commercial Banks (excluding RRBs) Dear Sir/Madam, Timely Issue of TDS Certificate to Customers It has been brought to our notice that, some banks are not providing TDS Certificate in Form 16A to their customers in time, causing inconvenience to customers in filing income-tax returns timely. 2. The matter [...]

The post Timely Issue of TDS Certificate to Customers appeared first on Corporate Law Reporter.

Due-Date for Filing Returns of Income in Cases of Income Tax Assessees in Gujarat Extended upto 14th October 2013

On consideration of reports of dislocation of general life caused due to recent heavy rains and floods in the State of Gujarat, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has extended the ‘due-date’ for filing Returns of Income from 30th September, 2013 to 14th October, 2013, in cases of Income Tax assessees in the State [...]

The post Due-Date for Filing Returns of Income in Cases of Income Tax Assessees in Gujarat Extended upto 14th October 2013 appeared first on Corporate Law Reporter.

Stamp Duty and Tax Implications in a Slump Sale

1.     Stamp Duty on Immovable Property in a Slump Sale

Although individual values cannot be assigned to the various assets for purposes of the transaction in a slump sale, appropriate values have to be considered for purposes of stamp duties. Under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, stamp duty is payable in relation to transfer of immovable properties. Generally, anything embedded in, or attached to, the earth (such as land or buildings) is considered immovable property and any transfer of the same can attract significant stamp duties. So, in any business transfer arrangement that seeks to transfer plant and machinery together with the land, and such plant and machinery is embedded in, or attached to, the earth, the same will be treated as immovable property and its transfer will be stampable accordingly.

While land/buildings are considered immovable property, whether machinery that has been installed becomes immovable property depends on the degree and permanency of the attachment, and the purpose of installing and attaching the machinery. For instance, the Supreme Court has held that a fertilizer plant, sold as part of a slump sale along with land and building, is immovable property as it was always intended that the plant remains permanently affixed to the land and building being transferred. However, this finding was specific to the facts of that case (Duncans Industries Ltd vs State of UP, AIR 2000 SC 355). Further, the Supreme Court also rejected the contention of the seller that the plant and machinery was transferred by delivery. The court held that unless the machinery was physically removed from the factory and delivered to the buyer at some other location, it would not be considered to be a sale of goods, which are transferred by delivery. Therefore, it would be construed that the sale deed for the immovable property should have also been stamped with the value of the plant and machinery.

2.     Taxation Laws

2.a. INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

S. 50B was introduced w.e.f. A.Y. 2000-01, which lays down a special provision for computation of capital gains in case of slump sale. S. 50B provides for computation of capital gains on slump sale of ‘undertaking or division’. An ‘undertaking’ may be owned by a corporate entity or a non-corporate entity, including a professional firm as S. 50B refers to ‘assessee’ without any specific exclusion of a non-corporate entity.

Taxability of gains arising on slump sale:

S. 50B provides the mechanism for computation of capital gains arising on slump sale. On a plain reading of the Section, some basic points which arise are :

1. S. 50B reads as ‘Special provision for computation of capital gains in case of slump sale’. Since slump sale is governed by a ‘special provision’, this Section overrides all other provisions of the Act.

2. Capital gains arising on transfer of an undertaking are deemed to be long-term capital gains. However, if the undertaking is ‘owned and held’ for not more than 36 months immediately before the date of transfer, gains shall be treated as short-term capital gains. It is important to note that Circular No. 779, dated 14-9-1999, issued at the time of introduction of S. 50B, has used the words ‘held’ instead of ‘owned and held’ used in the text of S. 50B. It is not clear whether this difference in terminology is of any significance.

Where an undertaking was acquired by an assessee under a will, and such an undertaking is transferred by him as a slump sale within a year, the undertaking will be classified as short-term or a long-term asset based on the period for which the previous owner ‘owned and held’ the undertaking [S. 49(1)(ii)].

3. Taxability arises in the year of transfer of the undertaking. The undertaking will be deemed to be transferred on execution of the agreement and registration thereof coupled with the handing over of possession of the undertaking to the transferee. However, if the year of the agreement of the undertaking and registration thereof and the year of its possession fall in two different previous years, then the previous year in which the possession of the undertaking is handed over to the transferee will be considered as the year of transfer.

4. Capital gains arising on slump sale are calculated as the difference between sale consideration and the net worth of the undertaking. Net worth is deemed to be the cost of acquisition and cost of improvement for S. 48 and S. 49 of the Act.

5. As per S. 50B, no indexation benefit is available on cost of acquisition, i.e., net worth.

6. In the year of transfer of the undertaking, the assessee has to furnish an accountant’s report in Form 3CEA along with the return of income indicating the computation of net worth arrived at and certifying that the figure of net worth has been correctly arrived at. Although the certification of computation is based on the information and explanations obtained by the accountant, the essence of the form is on reporting that the computation is ‘true and correct’ rather than ‘true and fair’.

7. In case of slump sale of more than one undertaking, the computation should be done separately for each undertaking. This is substantiated by Note 5 to Form 3CEA, which requires the computation of net worth of each undertaking to be indicated separately.

8. In case of slump sale in the nature of succession of a firm or a proprietary concern by a company, capital gains made on slump sale may be entitled to exemption u/s.47(xiii) and (xiv), respectively, provided the other conditions of these Sections are satisfied. In case of violation of conditions of S. 47(xiii) or (xiv) in any subsequent year, the benefit availed by the firm or the sole proprietor will be taxable in the hands of the successor company in the year in which the violation takes place as per S. 47A(3).

Besides, if the successor company violates the conditions of S. 47(xiii) or (xiv) by transferring that undertaking under a slump sale within three years of conversion, the undertaking will be classified as a short-term capital asset as per S. 50B. Then, the company would have to pay for the loss of tax benefit due to violation of conditions, as well as tax on the short-term capital gains arising on the slump sale.

9. Gains made by a foreign resident from the alienation of a permanent establishment or a fixed base in India by way of slump sale, shall be taxable in India as per S. 50B read with Article 13 (Capital Gains) of the UN/ OECD Model Convention on Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement.

2.b. VALUE ADDED TAX

The term ‘slump sale’ connotes the sale of an entire business undertaking, comprising of various assets net of liabilities for a lump sum or ‘slump’ consideration. Courts have held in a catena of judgments that the taxing authorities in case of a slump sale can not split the sale consideration and attribute it to different assets. Further, under the VAT and Sales Tax laws the term “business” is not covered under the definition of goods and accordingly no VAT implication would trigger on the transactions involving the transfer of business as a whole. The Allahabad High Court also upheld the same view in the case of Sri Ram Sahai vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax (1963) 14 STC 275 (All) and the Madras High Court in the case of Monsanto Chemicals Of India (P.) Limited V. The State of Tamil Nadu (1982) 51 STC 278 (Mad).

In the case of Coromondal Fertilizers Limited vs. State of AP and Spectra Bottling Co. v. State of AP,(1999) 112 STC 1 AP also the High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that sale of business would not be construed as sale in the course of business and hence would not be subject to sales tax.

If the position was reasonably clear-cut that a sale of a factory would attract only stamp duty and would not attract VAT, that would probably be acceptable to industry. However, all such transactions have several items of plant that are embedded in the ground and many other items that are movable in the factory. Even with respect to the items that are embedded in the ground, there would be many that can easily be removed and transported to any other location if required.

Therefore, a person entering into such a transaction has to face considerable uncertainty on the extent to which VAT is applicable on the transaction, along with the prospect of double taxation, since stamp duty would also be applicable.

2.c. SALES TAX

As discussed in the previous section, no sales tax payable on the transfer of a business as a going concern, including the transfer of a whole unit or division of any business under the value-added tax laws or the local sales tax laws. This is based on the rationale that the sale of an entire business cannot be equated with the sale of movable goods, the latter being subject to sales tax. The prevalent view in relation to sales tax in the case of a slump sale is that such sale would not attract sales tax since a business is not considered to be “goods” under sales tax laws.