Income tax department eyes over Rs 100 bn from ‘struck off’ firms

The income-tax (I-T) department is estimating tax recovery of over Rs 100 billion from companies that have been struck off from records of the Registrar of Companies (RoC) last year.

The tax department is in the process of filing a petition before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for restoration of registration in as many as 50,000 such companies.

The RoCs had struck off 300,000 companies after it was found they had not filed their statutory returns. Directors of these companies have been prohibited from holding directorships in any other company.
The move follows Central Board of Direct Taxes’ (CBDT) directive to identify, process and file petition to restore these companies by August 31. The board also asked the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) not to oppose the restoration application in the tribunal, as such a move would refrain them from launching tax recovery proceedings against these firms.
“Several of these companies are restricted to operate their bank accounts and movable and immovable properties until they are restored. The restoration will compel these firms to make relevant disclosures of credentials under Companies Act, and then accordingly tax proceeding will be initiated for tax recovery,” said an I-T official.

Tax industry experts, too, believe that restoration is essential to recover taxes due from these firms.

“The tax department is contesting the strike off of so-called companies as in several cases there would be pending tax demands that cannot be recovered if the company is not active. Also, even in cases where genuine companies have been struck off, with the best intentions, the companies would not be able to pay the tax dues as all their assets including bank accounts would be non-operational,” said Amit Maheshwari, partner at Ashok Maheshwary & Associates LLP.

The I-T department is of the view that these companies abused their corporate structure by creating multi-layering during  demonetisation for cash deposits. I-T probe also reveals that many individuals have used these firms for siphoning money or converting undisclosed cash to legitimate money post the note ban.

Official data say that 35,000 companies deposited and withdrew cash worth over Rs 170 billion after the note ban, through about 60,000 bank accounts.

It was noticed that the accounts that had negligible balance on November 8, 2016, have seen significant cash deposits and withdrawal during this period.

According to people with knowledge of the matter, along with restoration, the I-T department will also start issuing notices to these firms under Section 179 of the I-T Act, which makes the company’s directors/promoters liable to pay dues on behalf of the firm, without adjudication by the court.

Further, tax recovery officers have been asked to conduct survey operations on select firms where the tax demand is high. In cases where assets or bank accounts are lying abroad, the department will seek the foreign tax authority’s assistance to recover tax claims with the provisions in the relevant treaty, said another senior official.

Sources said that in a meeting of a task force on shell companies set up by the Prime Minister’s Office, on November 30 last year, the director general of corporate affairs (DGCoA) had suggested that the tax department approach RoCs for taking up the matter of reviving these companies. It was also suggested that revenue considerations should weigh in favour of restoring them.

Apart from these companies, another set of above 200,000 firms have been sent notices and action will soon be taken against them. However, the tax department wants MCA to keep them posted before striking off any company, since there could be tax dues.

 Taxing Affair
  • I-T pursuing restoration of 50,000 struck-off companies
  • RoCs had struck off 300,000 companies, prohibited their directors from holding directorship in other firms
  • Tax industry experts believe that restoration is essential for recovery of taxes from these firms
  • Restoration will allow companies to operate bank account, assets
  • After restoration, I-T to issue notices under Section 179 of I-T Act
  • Directors/promoters would be liable to pay tax dues
  • These firms abused corporate structure to facilitate significant cash transactions post note ban

Source: Business Standard

MCA sees Rs 2.8 lakh cr recovery from IBC-led resolution process

Section 12 (A) of IBC allows for a withdrawal of an insolvency application if 90% of the creditors’ committee (CoC) by voting share approving it.

Terming the current insolvency process and its outcomes as ‘super success, Ministry of Corporate Affairs sees total recovery amount touching Rs 2.8 lakh crore through resolutions with the settlement of two key accounts, including some others — Essar Steel, where financial creditors have approved the resolution and Bhushan SteelNSE 5.27 % and Power.

“The 100 cases that have been settled through resolution accounts, Rs 1.8 lakh crore have been netted which is not a small amount and the accounts sitting on margin (Bhushan Steel and Power & Essar Steel), another Rs 1 lakh crore along with some other mid-sized resolutions can come, so Rs 2.8 lakh crore out of Rs 10 lakh crore of NPA that time is not a small amount, IBC is a super success”, says MCA senior officials on the insolvency processes

In case of Essar Steel, the CoC has approved the resolution process but the process got stuck after operational creditor Standard Chartered moved NCLAT for higher share from the funds. The debt-ridden steel firm had Rs 42,000 crore coming from the resolution plan of global steel major ArcelorMittal.

JSW Steel had revised its offer for Bhushan Power & Steel from Rs 11,000 crore to Rs18,000 crore and later to over Rs 19,000 crore which the CoC had approved.

And it is not just resolution process-led recoveries, the official said pre-resolution processes have also yielded results in 6,500 cases netting Rs 3 lakh crore on dead assets.

“6500 cases settled involving claims of close to Rs 3 lakh crore where they have been have settled before admission. And now after 12 (A) has been introduced, another 100 cases which are at stages of 90% CoC approval are moving towards out of court settlements. Both (in and outside resolutions and NCLT) are happening. About 500 cases have got settled through the court process and 6,500 cases settled even before admission”, said the officials.

Section 12 (A) of IBC allows for a withdrawal of an insolvency application if 90% of the creditors’ committee (CoC) by voting share approving it.

MCA officials dismissed the notion of high haircuts through resolution process. They said: “It (IBC) is super success. There should not be any brouhaha over haircuts. Will anybody pay more than what is the value? Suppose an asset is used for 20 years, there is nothing more to it, there is a Rs 50,000 crore loan, liquidation value is Rs 1,000 crore, so you get (the creditors) Rs 1,000 crore only.”

“Wherever a resolution has taken place, creditors are getting 200% of the liquidation value. So definitely value maximisation is the context, demand and supply will fix the value”, the officials said.

Source: Economic Times

Government releases compliance schedule to ensure MSME payments

With a spate of corporate irregularities coming to the fore, the Centre has decided to make disclosure norms more stringent. Specified Companies (Furnishing of information about the payment to micro and small enterprise suppliers)
Every specified company shall file in MSME Form I details of all outstanding dues to Micro or small enterprises suppliers (whose payment is due or not paid within 46 days) dealing with MSME shall mandatorily file a return with MCA in e-form MSME-1.

Directors of companies delaying payments for supplies made by small businesses will face imprisonment up to six months or pay fines between Rs 25,000 and Rs 3,00,000.

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has notified new guidelines to address the concerns of small businesses over delayed payments that not only makes it mandatory for all companies to file half yearly returns detailing outstanding dues to MSME suppliers but also assign reasons if such delays are for more than 45 days.

The new rules have been implemented to put pressure on companies to pay up.

Under the proposed changes, every private and public company will mandatorily file “MSME FORM I” with the the Registrar of Companies (RoC) by February 22 with details of all outstanding dues to MSME suppliers existing on the date of notification of rules on January 22.

In addition, all entities will also have to file a return as per MSME Form I by October 31 for the period from April to September and by April 30 for the period from October to March.

If there are any delays in payments, it has to be mentioned in the returns with the MCA reserving the right to penalise defaulting entities.

In order to ensure adherence to the new rules, MCA has also proposed a fine of up to Rs 25,000 on companies defaulting in filing the information or delaying payments.

The fines for directors, chief financial officer and company secretary of a defaulting company has been specified at not less than Rs 25,000 up to Rs 3,00,000 per person with provision also for imprisonment up to six months.

The new rules will be applicable for every company that received goods or services ‘from’ MSME segment for which payment is due for 45 days or more.

The companies that have no outstanding payments to MSMEs or such outstanding payments are not for more than 45 days are not required to file details in the specified form.

For the purpose of new rules, MSMEs are defined on the basis of capital investment made in plant and machinery, excluding investments in land and building.

Manufacturing units having investment below Rs 25 lakh were termed Micro, those between Rs 25 lakh and Rs 5 crore termed as Small and from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10 crore as Medium.

Similarly, for Service units, corresponding investment thresholds were upto Rs 10 lakh Micro, between Rs 10 lakh to Rs 2 crore Small and between Rs 2 crore to Rs 5 crore Medium.

Source: Business Standard

Auditors barred from putting a value on companies they are auditing

An income tax tribunal has barred auditors from issuing valuation certificates to the companies they are auditing. This is set to impact several tax disputes around valuations in companies including angel tax disputes involving start-ups.

The Bangalore Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) said that auditors of a company cannot double up as accountants especially in situations while dealing with “share valuation for the purpose of excess share-premium taxability.”

In several cases the income tax department has disputed valuations of companies around the time of investments.

The ITAT ruling came in a case where the tax department had challenged valuation of a company by its auditor.

In most cases, valuations of startups were challenged by the tax department, leading to “angel tax.” The angel tax controversy surrounds the valuations during various rounds of startup funding. In several cases, the revenues at startups kept reducing or remained stagnant, but their valuations increased. The taxman is questioning the premiums paid by the investors and wants to categorise them as income that would be taxable at 30%. In most cases, the investments made by angel investors, venture capital funds or any other investor have been challenged by the taxman.

Many accountants and valuers are already facing heat from the tax department. ET had, on December 25, reported that the tax department has started issuing show-cause notices to valuation experts, questioning the premiums several startups fetched during their investments rounds.

Valuation experts, however, say that they merely projected and calculated future growth, using the facts and figures provided by the startups. Many tax experts point out that the tax department’s approach to the fair value as a benchmark for calculating premiums may not be accurate in the context of startups.

Income tax officers claim that the scrutiny on startups is mainly due to concerns that black money may have changed hands.

ITAT Ruling

CBDT warns Cash Transactions above Permissible Limits

CBDT warns Cash Transactions above Permissible Limits

With a view to promoting cashless transactions, the Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT ) has issued an advisory on its official website regarding cash transactions over and above the prescribed limits specified under the law.

 

The advisory issued by the Board remind the taxpayers to not accept cash of two lakh or more in aggregate from a single person in a day or for one or more transactions relating to one event or occasion.

 

One of the major steps introduced by the Government after the demonetization was to restrict cash transaction above Rs. 2 lakh rupees.

 

Under the Finance Act, 2017, the amounts in excess of Rs. 20,000 or more shall be received or repaid in cash for transfer of Immovable Property and amount more than Rs. 10,000/- in cash relating to the expenditure of business/profession was also banned.

 

Further, amount in excess of Rs. 2,000/- in cash cannot be donated to a registered trust /political party.

 

The department further reminded that the contravention may result in the levy of tax/ penalty.

 

The CBDT advisory said that any payment made in cash on account of the premium on health insurance facilities is not allowable as a deduction under section 80D of the Income Tax Act.

 

“Any information regarding black money including information about undisclosed income/ assets (both in India as well as abroad) and Benami transactions can be given to the jurisdictional Director General/ Pr. General of Income Tax (Investigation),” it said.

 

The CBDT has recently announced a new scheme called Income Tax Informants Rewards Scheme 2018 through which the department will reward up to 5 crore rupees to informants.

 

The scheme regulates grant and payment of reward to a person who is an informant under this scheme.

 

Also, the Benami Transactions Informants Reward Scheme 2018 has been announced for regulating grant for informants giving information relating to benami property actionable under Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, as amended by Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016.

As SEBI reforms startup listing, SMEs must ensure funds are not misused

SME ExchangeAmid SEBI banning as many as 239 entities for alleged money laundering, taxation consultancy PwC has called for a three-year locking-in for the entire pre-listing capital held by promoters to curb tax evasion and other illegal activities through market platforms.

The agency has called for imposing a similar lock-in even for preferential allotments, as prescribed under the capital and disclosure requirement (ICDR) norms so that only serious investors access the market. The PwC report is part of a BSE-mandated review of SME listing process.

The premier bourse last week said that 100 entities were trading on its SME platform. The regulator Securities and Exchange Board (SEBI) on June 29 banned four publicly traded SMEs and 235 other related entities for alledgely misusing the exchange’s platform for money laundering and tax evasion.

The SEBI, in an interim order alleged that these entities made Rs 614 crore in illegal gains through suspected money laundering and tax evasion activities. The four companies banned are EcoFriendly Food Processing Park, Esteem Bio Organic Food Processing, Channel Nine Entertainment and HPC Biosciences. These are traded on the BSE SME Platform.

“The institutional trading platform (ITP) could be utilised as a tool for tax planning by staying invested in an SME for a period more than 12 months and exiting at a very high stock price thereby making huge gains with no tax liability,” PwC said in the report.

Accordingly, the report has suggested that the entire pre-listing capital held by promoters should be locked in for three years as “such restrictive conditions would discourage people from accessing the platform only for tax planning”. The BSE had launched ITP for its SME platform to facilitate start-ups and other SMEs to list without the mandatory IPO process which is time-consuming and capital intensive that small companies can hardly afford.

According to PTI, in addition to allowing SMEs and start-up companies to raise capital, the BSE SME platrfom also provides easier entry and exit options for informed investors like angel investors, venture capitalists and private equity players, apart from offering better visibility and wider investor base and tax benefits to long-term investors.

Meanwhile, the report also called for a reduction in trading lot size and shorter interval for review of lot size after many SMEs, merchant bankers and market-makers cited this as a disincentive for entering the market. The report said market participants want the timeframe to review the lot size to be reduced from the current six months and lower the trading lot requirement of Rs 1 lakh to attract retail investors to the segment.

As SEBI continues to make business easier, it is important SMEs do not eye illegal gains through suspected money laundering and tax evasion activities.

 

SEBI calls for stringent laws against erring auditors, valuers

SEBI has proposed giving the board of directors of the company the authority to take appropriate action after conducting an investigation against the individual or firm that violates any regulations or submits a false certificate or report.

India’s capital market regulator has proposed amendments to tighten laws governing auditors and other third-party individuals hired by listed companies for auditing financial results, among other things.

The Kotak Committee, formed to come up with proposals for improving corporate governance, last year recommended that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) should have clear powers to act against auditors and other third-party individuals or firms with statutory duties under the securities law.

Auditing lapses have caused several frauds to go unnoticed for years and the capital market regulator has had no direct control on the auditing firms.

SEBI has proposed giving the board of directors of the company the authority to take appropriate action after conducting an investigation against the individual or firm that violates any regulations or submits a false certificate or report.

The proposed changes come months after Punjab National Bank, India’s second largest state-run lender, stunned markets after uncovering a $2 billion loan fraud that had gone undetected for years.

Merchant bankers, credit rating agencies, custodians, among others, are registered and regulated by SEBI but chartered accountants, company secretaries, valuers and monitoring agencies do not come under any direct regulators.

The amendments would mean auditors must ensure certificates or reports issued by them are true in all material respects and they must exercise all due care, skill and diligence with respect to all processes involved in issuance of the report or certificate.

The auditors would be responsible to report in writing to the audit committee of the listed company or the compliance officer on any violation of the securities law they noticed.

In January, SEBI barred Price Waterhouse from auditing listed companies in India for two years after an investigation into a nearly decade-old accounting fraud case in a software services company that became India’s biggest corporate scandal.

SEBI has sought feedback and comments on the draft regulations over the next 30 days.

 

Link: Business Today