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

 

Companies need not make adjustments in net profit for MAT under IndAS

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Corporate Updates, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0

Giving some clarity to companies switching to the new accounting standards, an expert Committee of Finance Ministry has said that there may not be any rise in tax burden for them.

The committee, led by retired Indian Revenue Service Officer MP Lohia, has concluded that corporates will not have to make any adjustments to net profits while computing book profits to pay minimum alternate tax (MAT).

“…considering the implicit relation between distributable profits which is available for payment of dividend distribution tax, no further adjustments are required to be made to the net profits (Excluding net other comprehensive income) of India AS compliant companies, other than those already specified…,” the Committee report said.

The government had set up the expert panel in June last year to resolve the differences arising in the computation of MAT when companies with a turnover of over Rs. 500 crore adopt the Indian Accounting Standards (IndAS) from 2016-17.

A number of firms had expressed concerns over their tax liabilities rising significantly due to the new system of accounting.

Public comments sought

The Finance Ministry has now sought public comments on the report by May 10, before it finalises the guidelines.

“The Committee submitted its report on 18 March, 2016 after having consultation with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA),” it said in a statement on Thursday.

“The net profits under Ind AS may include a sizeable amount of notional or unrealised gains or losses. If the MCA prescribes any further adjustments to the current year profits for computation of distributable profits, the requirement for any additional adjustments to the book profit under section 115JB may be examined,” said the Committee in its report.

It also recommended that items that are a part of the net other comprehensive income should be included in book profits for MAT purposes at an appropriate point of time. These include changes in revaluation surplus, re-measurements of defined benefit plans, gains and losses from investments in equity instruments designated at fair value.

It further said those adjustments recorded in reserves and which would subsequently be reclassified to the profit and loss account, should be included in book profits in the year in which these are classified to the profit and loss account.

Positive response

Experts welcomed the report and said it is in harmony with the current structure.

“Industry can now start preparing themselves for the accounting standards. It has indicated that the same treatment would be carried forward,” said Vikas Gupta, Partner, Nangia & Co.

Sunil Shah, Partner, Deloitte, concurred, saying: “The usual adjustments will continue to be made.

But, there could be an impact in cases where unrealised gains and losses on fair value accounting are recorded in the profit and loss account, which is permissible under IndAS.”

 

Source: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/todays-paper/tp-news/companies-need-not-make-adjustments-in-net-profit-for-mat-under-indas/article8534184.ece

If you bought property but have not deposited TDS, you may get a tax notice

by | posted in: Corporate Updates, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0
While the rule has been in effect since June 1, 2013, many buyers are unaware or often confused about how to calculate the tax.If you bought property worth more than Rs 50 lakh and did not deduct tax at source (TDS) or failed to deposit the amount with the income tax department on time, you may have to pay a penalty of up to Rs 1 lakh.

Several taxpayers recently received notices from the department for no t doing so. Anyone buying real estate worth more than Rs 50 lakh has to deduct 1% of the price of the property before paying the seller. That 1% TDS has to be deposited with the tax department using Form 26 QB.

“The income tax department recently matched the TDS data with the data they received from the property registrar for property transactions over `50 lakh. Wherever there was a discrepancy, either the buyers failed to deduct or deposit the TDS, a notice has been sent,” said Vaibhav Sankla, director, H&R Block.

While the rule has been in effect since June 1, 2013, many buyers are unaware or often confused about how to calculate the tax. TDS has to be calculated on the total sale price  and not the amount exceeding Rs 50 lakh.

“Sometimes total sale price, which exceeds `50 lakh in aggregate, may be payable in instalments. The TDS in that case must be deducted from each instalment no matter how small the instalment is. Most people fail to do that,” said Archit Gupta, founder, ClearTax.in.

In case the payment is made in instalments, then TDS needs to be deducted at the time of making each payment. This TDS, deducted each time while paying the instalment, is to be deposited with the department by way of return cum challan (Form 26QB) within seven days of the following month of making the payment. Failing to do so can, apart from the dues and late filing interest, attract a penalty under Section 271H of up to Rs 1 lakh.

For those who have received a notice, the immediate corrective step to avoid paying a penalty is to pay the TDS along with the applicable interest and late filing fee.

The interest payable under Section 201 is 1% per month if tax wasn’t deducted and 1.5% in case this was done but not paid.

“This interest is calculated on the TDS amount from the date of payment, whether paid in lump sum or in instalments,” said Sankla. Take the example of a property purchased in January 2015 worth Rs 60 lakh where the first Rs 20 lakh was paid that month and the rest in June that year. For the first instalment of Rs 20 lakh, the interest will be applicable from January onwards, while that on the second payment will be from June 2015. There is also a late filing fee under Section 234E for delaying the interest payment of `200 per day, subject to the maximum of taxes due. There may be some leniency if the seller has already paid capital gains tax or claimed capital gains exemption (on the sale of property).

“The intent of the department is that there is no tax evasion. So, if the seller has already paid the taxes, the buyer can submit Form 26A certificate from a chartered accountant and request that penalty under Section 234E should not be levied,” said Gupta. Though this will save you from the late filing fee, the interest under Section 201 will still apply.

Buyers should also remember to issue Form 16B. “It is generated via TRACES and the seller may not be able to take tax credit for TDS deducted in case of non-filing or latefiling of Form 26QB,” said Gupta. Penalties remain the same for failing to do so.

Source:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/51901867.cms

 

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

 

Key changes in new Income Tax Return (ITR) forms

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

The Finance Act, 2015 abolished the wealth-tax. Thus, taxpayers are no longer required to file returns of wealth tax from assessment year 2016-17 onwards. However, the Hon’ble Finance Minister in his budget speech had announced that information which was to be furnished in wealth tax return will now form part of Income Tax Returns (ITR).

Thus, in new ITR forms, namely, ITR-1, ITR-2, ITR-2A and ITR-4S the Government has imposed obligation on Individuals and HUFs having income exceeding Rs 50 lakhs to furnish information regarding assets and liabilities.

2.0 Changes made in new ITR forms:-

2.1 Declaration of value of assets and liabilities by Individuals/HUF earning above Rs 50 lakhs:-

[ITR 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 4S]

The new ITR forms introduce a new Schedule requiring individuals/HUFs to declare the value of assets and liabilities if their total income exceeds Rs. 50 lakhs. Assets include immovable assets and movable assets. Under the heading immovable assets, taxpayers have to disclose cost of land and building. Under movable assets cost of Jewellery, bullion, vehicles, Yachts, boats, aircraft and cash in hand need to be disclosed. Further, such taxpayers need to disclose all liabilities in relation to such assets.

Note: Individuals and HUFs with income exceeding 25 lakhs, filing ITR-3 and ITR-4 were already required to furnish information of their assets and liabilities. Now such threshold limit of 25 lakhs has been increased to 50 lakhs in new ITR-3 and ITR-4 for disclosure of details of assets and liabilities.

2.2          TCS credit for individual taxpayers:-

[ITR 1, 2, 2A]

Sub-section (1D) was inserted in Section 206 by the Finance Act, 2012 to reduce the practice of cash payments for purchase of bullion and Jewellery and for curbing the flow of unaccounted money in the trading system.

Section 206(1D) provides that the seller of bullion and Jewellery shall collect TCS at 1% of sale consideration from buyer if such sale consideration is received in cash and it exceeds:

i) 2 lakh, in case Bullion; and

ii) 5 lakh, in case of Jewellery.

However, in the absence of any row in the ITR Forms (ITR 1, 2 and 2A), individual taxpayers were unable to claim credit of such TCS. Therefore, new ITR Forms provide an option to claim TCS by the individual taxpayers.

2.3          Firms can file ITR-4S for presumptive income:-

[ITR-4S]

Under the existing provisions of Rule 12, firms were required to file ITR 5 even for presumptive income. The amended Rule 12 would now allow firms to file ITR 4S for presumptive income. Accordingly, a separate row is provided for in ITR 4S to claim deduction of interest and salary paid by the firms to the partners.

2.4        Additional deduction for contribution to NPS under Section 80CCD :-

[ITR 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4 and 4S]

A new sub-section (1B) was introduced in Section 80CCD by the Finance Act, 2015 to provide for an additional deduction of upto Rs. 50,000 for investment in National Pension Scheme. Accordingly, a new row is now introduced in the ITR Forms to claim benefits of such additional deduction.

2.5          Details of pass through income of business trust or investment fund:-

[ITR 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]

As per provisions of Section 115UA and Section 115UB,pass through status is provided in respect ofincome [other than income from business or profession] of business trust/investment fund. Thus, income distributed by the business trust/investment fund is to be taxed in the hands of the unit holders.

The new ITR Forms have a new ‘Schedule PTI’ for reporting of pass through income of business trust/investment fund. Following details should be provided by such trust in ITR forms:

■  Name of business trust/investment fund

■  PAN

■  Head of income

■  Amount of income

■  TDS on such amount, if any.

2.6 Disclosure of details regarding partnership firm by a partner:-

[ITR 3, 4]

In ITR forms there is a separate ‘Schedule IF’ wherein partners are required to disclose the name of the partnership firms in which he is a partner. Now partners have to disclose whether such firm is liable to transfer pricing audit under Section 92E. Separate column has been inserted for such purpose in ‘Schedule IF’.

2.7 Share of income from firm/AOP/BOI:-

[ITR 3, 4, 5, 6]

Share of income from partnership firm, AOP and BOI is exempt from tax in hands of recipient. However, such exempt income had to be disclosed in old ITR forms under ‘Schedule EI’. Now, disclosure of such exempt income has been done away with in new ITR forms.

2.8 Deduction of additional investment allowance:-

[ITR 4, 5, 6]

Section 32AD was inserted by the Finance Act, 2015 to provide for an additional investment allowance to an undertaking set-up in the notified backward areas in the States of Andhra Pradesh or Telangana. Suitable safeguards have been provided in the provision for restricting the transfer of the plant or machinery for a period of 5 years. On transfer of such asset within five years, the amount of deduction already allowed shall be deemed as income from business or profession (i.e., deemed income under Section 32AD) in the year of transfer.

A separate row has been inserted in new ITR forms to claim such deduction under Section 32AD. Further, a separate row is provided to offer the deemed income to tax under Section 32AD.

2.9 Effect of Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (‘ICDS’):-

[ITR 4, 5, 6]

New ‘Schedule ICDS’ has been inserted in ITR forms wherein effect of Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (‘ICDS’) on profit needs to be disclosed.

2.10       Percentage of commercial receipts by a trust:-

[ITR 7]

The Finance Act, 2015 has substituted the proviso to Section 2(15) to provide that the advancement of any other object of general public utility shall not be a charitable purpose, if it involves the carrying on of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business, unless:

i) such activity is undertaken in the course of actual carrying out of such advancement of any other object of general public utility; and

ii) the aggregate receipts from such activity or activities during the previous year, do not exceed 20% of the total receipts, of the trust or institution undertaking such activity or activities, of that previous year.

In other words, advancement of any other object of charitable purpose shall not be deemed as charitable if receipts from any commercial activity exceed 20% of total receipts. Accordingly, a new row is inserted in ITR 7 to disclose percentage of commercial receipts vis-à-vis total receipts in order to ensure that such condition (as given hereinabove) is not violated.

2.11       Application of income by a trust:-

[ITR 7]

Income of charitable or religious trust is exempt if 85% of its income is applied for charitable or religious purposes in India. If income applied for charitable or religious purposes during the previous year falls short of 85% because such income has not been received during the year or due to any other reason, an option is given to assessee to apply such income in future years in prescribed manner. Assessee has to choose such an option by filing Form 9A to the Assessing Officer before due date of filing return of income under Section 139(1).

Now a separate row is provided in new ITR 7 requiring trust to confirm if it has filed Form 9A to exercise such an option and the date of filing of such form.

2.12       Details to be given by Universities, hospitals, educational institutions:-

[ITR 7]

Exemption under sub-clause (iiiab) and (iiiac) of Section 10(23C) is available to universities or educational institutions, hospitals or other institutions which are wholly or substantially financed by the Government, subject to certain prescribed conditions. The Finance Act, 2015 has amended the provisions of Section 139 to provide that such entities covered under clauses (iiiab) and (iiiac) of Section 10(23C) shall be mandatorily required to file their returns of income.

Now such universities, hospitals, educational institutions, etc., have to disclose their name and annual receipts in new ITR 7. Further, they are also required to disclose the amount eligible for exemption in ITR 7.

2.13       Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) disclosure:-

[ITR-6, 7]

The Finance Act, 2015 had excluded following incomes for computing MAT liability:

i) Share of a member in the income of the AOP/BOI, on which no income-tax was payable.

ii) Passive income (like capital gains, interest, royalty, FTS) accruing or arising to foreign company if income-tax payable thereon was less than 18.5%.

iii)  Amount representing:

–          Notional gain on transfer of a capital asset, being share of SPV to a business trust in exchange of units allotted by that trust referred to in clause (xvii) of Section 47; or

–          Notional gain resulting from change in carrying amount of said units; or

–          Gain on transfer of units referred to in clause (xvii) of section 47.

iv) Loss on transfer of units referred to in Section 47(xvii) (subject to conditions)

 

Consequently, the Finance Act, 2015 had provided for addition of related expenditure on aforesaid income while computing MAT liability.

Separate row have now been inserted in ITR forms to incorporate such changes.

 

2.14       Disclosure of Audit information:-

[ITR 5, 6]

In new ITR forms there is a separate row for disclosure of following details if taxpayer is liable for audit under any Act [other than the Income Tax Act]:

1)         Act and Section under which taxpayer is liable for audit

2)         Date of furnishing of Audit Report.

2.15 Deduction of sum paid for purchase of sugarcane:-

[ITR-5]

The Finance Act, 2015 had inserted Section 36(1)(xvii) to provide that co-operative society, engaged in the business of manufacturing of sugar, could claim deduction of expenditure on purchase of sugarcane to the extent of price approved or fixed by the Government. Expenditure in excess of such fixed price was to be disallowed.

 

New ITR-5 has inserted a separate row for disclosure of sum which is disallowable under Section 36(1)(xvii).

2.16 Deduction under section 80JJAA:-

[ITR 4, 5]

Old provisions of section 80JJAA, inter alia, provided for deduction to an Indian company, deriving profits from manufacture of goods in a factory. The quantum of deduction allowed was equal to 30% of additional wages paid to the new regular workmen employed by the assessee in such factory, in the previous year, for three assessment years including the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which such employment was provided.

With a view to encourage generation of employment, the Finance Act, 2015 had amended Section 80JJAA so as to extend the benefit of such provision to all assessees having manufacturing units rather than restricting it to corporate assessees only.

New ITR-4 and ITR-5 forms now contain a separate row for such taxpayers (other than corporate taxpayers) to claim benefit of such deduction under Section 80JJA