E-filing of tax returns jumps 68.5% in April, 2016

by | posted in: Corporate Updates, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0

E-filing of tax returns witnessed a jump of 68.5% in the first month of the current fiscal year with over 8.32 lakh assessees filing ITRs electronically.

The number of e-filed returns recorded in April 2015-16 stood at 4.94 lakh. In all, 4.33 crore returns were electronically filed last fiscal.

As per the data of Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), a total of 8,32,499 assessees have filed returns in April 2016.

Unlike previous year, the CBDT had operationalised all the nine types of Income Tax Returns (ITRs) filed by different types of assesses from this fiscal.

Over the years, the e-filing process has been simplified and assessees can file returns even from the comfort of their homes.

As per the CBDT, there were over 5.25 crore registered users (on April 30, 2016) and about 49.54% of the returns were received outside office hours. Also, 35.27% of assesses used the utility provided by the department.

An online ‘tax calculator’ for filers is meant to help taxpayers assess tax liability.

Divya Baweja, Partner, Deloitte Haskins and Sells LLP said during the initial years, e-filing was considered to be an onerous task, but now the process has become a “simple affair”.

“In recent years, tax department has made a conscious effort to ease the e-filing procedure by simplifying the tax return forms and introducing tax utilities which automatically picks data from previous year’s tax return/tax credit statement, thereby making it much easier for a common individual to file his or her tax return,” she said.

The CBDT had notified the new forms on March 30, and ITRs can be filed till the stipulated deadline of July 31.

The data further said during April, the maximum returns were filed from Maharashtra followed by Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh.

People with an income of more than Rs 50 lakh per annum and who own luxury items like yacht, aircraft or valuable jewellery will have to disclose these expensive assets with the IT department in the new ITRs.

Last year, the e-filing commenced on July 1 following the controversy over a 14-page form requiring assessees to disclose bank account and foreign travel details.

Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/E-filing-of-tax-returns-jumps-68-5-in-April/articleshow/52277938.cms

Income tax refunds worth Rs 1.22 lakh cr issued in FY’16: Govt

by | posted in: Corporate Updates, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0

The Income Tax department has issued 2.10 crore refunds totalling over Rs 1.22 lakh crore in 2015-16, which saw 94 per cent the returns being filed online.

“During FY 2015-16, more than 2.10 crore refunds amounting to Rs 1,22,425 crore were paid compared to Rs 1,12,188 crore in the Financial Year 2014-15 and Rs 89,664 crore in the Financial Year 2013-14,” a finance ministry statement said.

In 2015-16, more than 94 per cent of income tax returns were filed online and 4.14 crore returns were processed by the Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru, without any human intervention.

Both the Central Board of Director Taxes (CBDT) and Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) are making optimum use of technology for expeditious disposal of assessment and refunds as well as for addressing the issues relating to custom clearance and facilitating trade among others, it said.

As regards indirect tax collections last fiscal, the indirect tax to GDP ratio is about 5.17 per cent as compared to 4.36 per cent for FY 2014-15.

Indirect tax to GDP ratio for the current Financial Year 2016-17 is estimated to be 5.20 per cent, the ministry said.

E-payment of Central Excise and Service Tax refunds and rebates through RTEGS/NEFT has been implemented and 80 percent of the refund amount is granted within 5 days for service exporters.

Single Window Interface for Facilitating Trade (SWIFT) acts as a single point interface for over 50 offices of six government agencies for clearance of Exim Goods and reduces documentation and costs, thereby benefiting over 97 per cent of India’s imports, the ministry added.

Source: http://www.firstpost.com/business/income-tax-refund-financial-year-2768332.html

Ultra-rich must declare cost price of expensive assets: CBDT

by | posted in: Corporate Updates, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0

People with annual income of over Rs 50 lakh will have to disclose the acquisition cost of all the assets like land, building and jewellery in the Income Tax return forms for assessment year 2016-17.

The luxury items to be disclosed will also include utensils, apparels and furnitures studded with precious stones and ornaments made of gold, silver, platinum or any other precious metal or alloy.

“The amount in respect of assets to be reported will be the cost price of such assets to the assessee,” the Central Board of Direct Taxes ( CBDT) has said while issuing instructions on the new ITR forms.

In case the precious items had been received as gifts, the assessee will have to declare the cost of acquisition by the previous owner along with value additions.
“In case where the cost at which the asset was acquired by the previous owner is not ascertainable and no wealth-tax return was filed in respect of such asset, the value may be estimated at the circle rate or bullion rate, as the case may be, on the date of acquisition by the assessee as increased by cost of improvement, if any, or March 31, 2016,” the instructions said.

The assessee will also have to declare whether such items and their value were disclosed at the time of filing wealth tax returns earlier.

The tax department had in April notified the new ITR forms for assessment year 2016-17 and introduced a fresh reporting column in ITR-1, ITR-2 and 2A called ‘Asset and Liability at the end of the year’ which is applicable in cases where the total income exceeds Rs 50 lakh.

“There are only 1.5 lakh individuals whose total income would be above Rs 50 lakh. This schedule in ITR only applies to ultra-rich and will not affect the common man,” Revenue Secretary Hasmukh Adhia had earlier said.

As per the new schedule in ITR forms, individuals and entities coming under this total income bracket will have to mention the total cost of movable and immovable assets.

While immovable assets include land and building, movable assets to be disclosed were cash in hand, jewellery, bullion, vehicles, yachts, boats, aircraft etc.

ITR-1 can be filed by individuals having income from salaries, one house property and from other sources including interest. ITR-2 is filed by Individuals and HUFs not having income from business or profession. ITR-2A is filed by those individuals and HUFs who do not have income from business or profession and capital gains and who do not hold foreign assets.

Read Source:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/52106652.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

 

Government looks to resolve 100 transfer pricing issues; seeks to sign more advanced agreements

by | posted in: Corporate Updates, Cross Border Transactions, M&As, Joint Ventures, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies, India & International - Corporate updates | 0
Due to new regulatory frameworks like Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), transfer pricing disputes could go up in all major economies

In a significant move towards a more progressive taxation policy the revenue officials have set an aggressive target of resolving about 100 transfer pricing issues by signing advance pricing agreements (APAs) with multinationals this fiscal, people close to the development said.

The government, through the Central Bureau of Direct Taxes (CBDT), had signed a record 55 APAs with multinationals in 2015-16. In all, the Indian government has signed 64 APAs, including 62 in the last two years. Now the government is getting more ambitious and officials are confident about achieving the target.

“We are already working on about 175 cases (APAs), and the target is achievable,” said a person close to the development. “Also, the officers who are dealing with the issue have now got fair amount of experience and work would be faster going ahead.”

Samir Gandhi, partner at Deloitte Haskins & Sells LLP, said, “In last one year, we have seen that the government has been very active in resolving the transfer pricing cases through the APAs. Going forward it is very likely that we will see more number of cases being resolved.”

An APA is mainly an agreement between a tax payer—mostly multinationals— and tax authority— CBDT in India’s case—where the transfer pricing methodology is determined. The methodology to calculate taxes could then be used for an agreed period of time on the tax payer’s future international transactions.

Transfer pricing disputes are mainly related to the calculation of profit made by multinational companies and how they have been shifted to their parent. Many firms have gone to court, challenging the government’s transfer pricing calculations. In July 2012, the government introduced the APA programme, which allows companies and the revenue authorities to negotiate the rate at which tax is to be paid and avoid disputes. Of the total APAs signed last year, 53 were unilateral agreements while two were bilateral agreements.

A unilateral APA is an agreement between the tax payer and the tax authority of the country (CBDT). A bilateral agreement is signed by these two plus the tax authority of the country where the multinational is headquartered.

Industry trackers expect that some more “complicated” APAs would be signed this year. “Going ahead some of these cases (APAs) will involve relatively complex cases/transactions and also application of TP methodologies of profit split and TNMM (transactional net margin method),” said Gandhi of Deloitte. Industry experts said the shift from a time when India was considered to be one of the most aggressive in the world on transfer pricing to the current situation has happened in last two years.

“There are primarily two developments which have happened in last one year in the context of transfer pricing disputes,” said Rohan K Phatarphekar, partner and national head, global transfer pricing services, at KPMG. “One is the government’s agenda of having a non-adversarial tax regime and improving the ease of doing business, which has resulted in lesser amount of transfer pricing adjustments, and the other is the CBDT circular clearly laying out the guidelines as to when a case needs to be referred for transfer pricing assessment which has reduced the overall number of cases picked up for scrutiny,” he said.

Experts also pointed out that the government’s stance on liberal transfer pricing comes at a time when many multinationals face the prospect of increasing disputes across the world. Due to new regulatory frameworks like Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), transfer pricing disputes could go up in all major economies.

Companies and tax consultants said that not only is the Indian government going all guns to resolve old issues in last one year, but also there has been no major transfer pricing demand as officials did not take an aggressive stance. Currently there are about 650 pending cases in APA, according to a report by Deloitte.

Going ahead, a lot of disputes also set to be resolved due to mutual APAs signed between Indian authorities and their US counterpart. This is mainly because the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has started accepting bilateral APA applications with India from February 16, 2016, the Deloitte report said.

Source:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/51886742.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

NRIs with offshore bank accounts cannot escape investigation by tax authorities

by | posted in: Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Cross Border Transactions, M&As, Joint Ventures, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0
Governed by rules and conventions of banking secrecy, banks in Switzerland and tax havens divulge information only after account holders give their consent.

Even NRIs with offshore bank accounts cannot keep the taxman at bay by obtaining quick relief from the court of law. In order to prove their innocence, such persons will have to instruct the overseas banks to share information on the accounts with the Indian tax office.

And, only after the details released by the bank show that the money lying in the account does not belong to the person who has been pulled up (for hiding offshore assets), can he escape the glare of tax officials.

The Bombay High Court recently dismissed the writ petition filed by an NRI — an alleged beneficiary of a trust linked to an account with HSBC Geneva — after she refused to sign the “consent waiver” form to let HSBC share the information on the account. Governed by rules and conventions of banking secrecy, banks in Switzerland and tax havens divulge information only after account holders gives their consent.

The court, in its order dated April 5, said, “In the normal course of human conduct if a person has nothing to hide and serious allegations/questions are being raised about the funds, a person would make available the documents which would put to rest all questions which seem to arise in the mind of the authorities.”

Since the court did not allow the withdrawal of petition, the order is likely to be used by the tax office which is trying to fish out bank account and transaction details from those it suspects to have accounts with HSBC Geneva.

According to the base note that the French government had shared with New Delhi, the petitioner Soignee R Kothari, along with six other individuals and two trusts, are beneficiaries of an account held by one White Cedar Investments with HSBC Geneva; the seven individuals in turn are beneficial owners of the two trusts.

As on 26 March 2006, the account had a balance of more than $44 million. The department had served Ms Kothari a notice to reopen assessment for the assessment year 2006-07.

She has later agreed (in a rejoinder before the court) to sign the consent waiver form with a modification — as ‘alleged beneficiary’ rather than ‘holder or beneficiary’ of the account in HSBC Geneva.

“With this, the Bombay High Court has precluded any alleged holder of overseas bank account from seeking alternative remedy by way of a writ. However, their right to contest any addition of income by the tax authorities would still survive. Thus, while NRIs can prove that they are outside jurisdiction of Indian tax authorities, they cannot wriggle out of investigation by virtue of being NRIs,” said senior chartered accountant Dilip Lakhani. The other six alleged beneficiaries of the trust are Arun Ramniklal Mehta, Russell Mehta, Viraj Russell Mehta, Rihen Harshad Mehta, Naina Harshad Mehta and Priti Harshad Mehta.

The court said that this bank statement if obtained from HSBC Geneva “would reveal and/or possibly give clues as to the source of amounts deposited in the Account No. 5091404580.” “If a person has nothing to hide, we believe the person would have co-operated in obtaining bank statements,” said

Source : http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/51870910.cms