CA in Jaipur | CA. Yogesh Jangid |ITR Filing 2023 | Company Registration | NGO Registration | Income Tax Raid Cases | Audit | Inc Incroporation | CPA in India | Subsidy | Project Funding | GST | GST Raid Cases | Income Tax Notice Faceless | DRI Cases |

Income Tax Department Cracks Down on Unfiled Returns: 1.52 Crore Individuals Targeted

editor — Mon, 15 Apr 2024 04:21:28 +0000

Large Discrepancy Between Taxpayers and Filed Returns

The Income Tax Department is launching a campaign to target individuals who haven’t filed their income tax returns (ITR) despite meeting filing requirements. According to a report in the Economic Times, the department has identified 1.52 crore such individuals.

Data Discrepancies Trigger Action

This initiative stems from a data analysis by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) which revealed a significant gap between the total number of taxpayers (8.9 crore in financial year 2022-23) and the number of ITRs filed (7.4 crore, including revised returns). This suggests that potentially 1.97 crore individuals might not have filed their returns even though tax was deducted at source (TDS) from their income.

Focus on High-Value Transactions

The I-T Department is particularly interested in individuals with high bank transactions linked to their PAN cards. Officials will be contacting these individuals to explain the importance of filing ITRs. Additionally, the CBDT has identified nearly 9,000 potential taxpayers who might have made high-value purchases or cash deposits and will be sending them tax notices.

Consequences for Non-Compliance

Individuals who deliberately neglected to file returns will face penalties. However, those with genuine reasons for the sudden increase in income can submit an explanation or file a return to rectify the situation.

Data Analytics Boosts Tax Collection

The Income Tax Department’s access to a vast amount of data has proven instrumental in identifying non-filers and uncovering inconsistencies. This focus on data analysis is credited with contributing to a significant rise (19.88%) in net direct tax collection, exceeding ₹18.90 lakh crore as of March 17th.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/business/it-department-to-tap-1-52-crore-individuals-for-income-tax-return-filing-heres-why-101713003056572.html

category

GST Evasion and the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI)

editor — Fri, 12 Apr 2024 05:40:03 +0000

Instances of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) investigating tax evasion are frequently encountered. Many may wonder about the role and operations of this organization. Here, we delve into key questions surrounding DGGI and its functioning.

What is DGGI?

DGGI, formerly known as the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI), is primarily tasked with combating GST evasion. As the apex intelligence body under the CBIC, it collects intelligence related to GST evasion.

Role of DGGI:

DGGI’s mandate includes gathering, analyzing, and disseminating intelligence on GST, Central Excise (CE), and Service Tax (ST) evasion. It also investigates offenses involving such evasion, suggests policy changes, and collaborates with other law enforcement agencies.

Presence of DGGI:

Headquartered in New Delhi, DGGI operates through regional and zonal units across the country, comprising a relatively lean workforce of approximately 1500 personnel.

Operation of DGGI:

The intelligence-gathering process involves sophisticated data analysis, monitoring sectoral performance, scrutinizing company submissions, and collaborating with state GST enforcement bodies. Additionally, information from informers, including disgruntled employees, is integral to its operations.

Informers and Rewards:

DGGI maintains a robust reward scheme to incentivize informers, offering rewards of up to 20% of recovered amounts. Similarly, officers involved in case detection and resolution are eligible for rewards.

Assessment of Information:

Collected intelligence undergoes rigorous examination to confirm its validity and actionable nature. Subsequently, investigations may commence through summons or, if deemed necessary, through inspection, search, and seizure under relevant provisions.

Powers and Functions:

DGGI exercises powers of inspection, search, and seizure under the CGST Act, subject to legal safeguards and due process. Reasonable belief is crucial in initiating such actions, and adherence to legal procedures is paramount.

Outcome of Raids:

Following raids or search operations, individuals are summoned to provide explanations. Where evidence suggests offenses, arrests can be made, subject to legal provisions and procedures.

Show Cause Notices:

After collecting evidence, evasion charges are formalized through Show Cause Notices (SCNs), allowing parties opportunities to defend themselves and appeal.

Awareness and Compliance:

Taxpayers and companies are advised to adhere strictly to legal requirements, as evasion detection mechanisms are advanced. Compliance, engagement with authorities, and staying abreast of legal developments are recommended.

New SOP for DGGI:

A recent SOP issued by CBIC suggests a need for balanced enforcement practices, avoiding overreach. Close engagement with industry and adherence to legal interpretations are emphasized.

Source: CNBC-TV18 (https://www.cnbctv18.com/business/explained-heres-what-you-should-know-about-gst-evasion-and-dggi-19394551.html)

category

CBDT Urges Officers to Identify Top 30 Cases of TDS Shortfall by June 30, 2024

editor — Wed, 10 Apr 2024 05:13:23 +0000

The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has instructed income tax officers to scrutinize the top 30 cases of insufficient tax deduction at source (TDS) and resolve at least 150 appeals by the Commissioner of Income Tax before June 30, 2024.

These directives are outlined in the interim action plan released by the CBDT for the fiscal year 2024-25, delineating the primary focus areas for field formations.

According to a recent communication from the CBDT to its officials, specific Key Result Areas have been identified for timely accomplishment, alongside attending to statutory limitation matters.

The CBDT routinely issues interim action plans to its officials at the onset of each financial year, refining them later in the year to form the final plan.

Additionally, the CBDT has called for seminars and awareness campaigns to be conducted on TDS. Over the years, TDS has emerged as a significant revenue source for the government, surging from Rs 2.13 lakh crore in FY13 to Rs 8.17 lakh crore in FY23.

As part of its interim plan for the current fiscal, the CBDT has also mandated the immediate approval of all pending refunds withheld under Section 241(A) once scrutiny assessments are completed and requisite orders are passed, either immediately or by April 30, 2024.

Furthermore, the CBDT has directed that all information requested by enforcement agencies such as the CBI, SEBI, and Enforcement Directorate before March 31, 2024, must be shared by the end of April. For requests received after April 1, information should be provided within 15 days.

Field officers are also tasked with identifying cases where seized assets are due for release as per Section 132B and facilitating their release by June 30, 2024.

Source: Business Today

category

High Court of Madras sets aside GST penalty, emphasizes fair hearing and pre-assessment payments in tax disputes.

editor — Tue, 09 Apr 2024 07:10:27 +0000

Introduction

The High Court of Madras recently ruled on a case involving a works contractor for government departments, addressing penalties imposed under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court emphasized the importance of fair hearings and pre-assessment payments in tax disputes.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a works contractor, received an assessment order on April 19, 2023, due to discrepancies in their GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B returns.
A show cause notice was issued in February 2023.
On April 12, 2023, before the assessment order was issued, the petitioner paid Rs. 3,00,000/- towards their tax liability, citing delayed payments from government departments as the reason for the discrepancies and delayed payment.
The petitioner contested the imposition of a 100% penalty on the dues under Section 74 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Issue

The core issue revolves around the justification of imposing a 100% penalty on the petitioner, considering the pre-order payment and the circumstances leading to the discrepancies.

Petitioner’s Argument

Held

The court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondent to remit an additional Rs. 3,00,000/-. Moreover:

category

Audit wing of SGST Authority shall keep all proceedings in abeyance if the subject matter is pending before the CGST Authority

editor — Thu, 04 Apr 2024 10:57:29 +0000

The Audit division of the State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) Authority is mandated to suspend all actions if a matter is pending before the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Authority, according to a ruling by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Mahabir Prasad Kedia v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax [MAT No. 2388 of 2023 dated January 9, 2024].

Facts:

Mr. Mahabir Prasad Kedia, the Appellant, received an audit memo highlighting several discrepancies.
Upon receiving the audit notice, the Appellant informed the SGST Authority about a show cause notice (SCN) issued by the anti-evasion wing of the CGST Department on March 28, 2023, addressing the same issues for the financial years 2017-2018 to 2021-2022.
The Appellant responded to the Impugned SCN on May 04, 2023, and the matter was pending adjudication.
Despite the Appellant's submission, the audit wing of the SGST Authority overlooked it and proceeded with the matter.
The subject was pending adjudication by the CGST Authority, to whom the Appellant had submitted a reply on May 02, 2023.

Held:

The Calcutta High Court ruled that the SGST Authority's audit division should suspend proceedings concerning the discrepancy noted, as the matter was under consideration by the CGST Authority.
Following this decision, the SGST Authority issued an SCN on December 29, 2023, clarifying that the audit wing should not proceed with the matter.
Consequently, the appeal, along with related applications and writ petitions, was disposed of.
The SGST Authority was directed to halt all proceedings regarding the noted discrepancy, including the show cause notice issued on December 29, 2023, and adhere to the adjudication order from the CGST Authority regarding the Impugned SCN.

category

Employees get ₹3,731 crore GST penalty demand; Bombay HC strikes it down

editor — Thu, 04 Apr 2024 05:43:47 +0000

Should an employee of a company be held responsible for forking out penalties related to tax demands raised on the company by revenue authorities? Goods and Services Tax (GST) enforcement officials believed so when they slapped a demand last September for a ₹3,731 crore penalty on a taxation manager and other employees of global logistics major Maersk for alleged tax evasion of the same amount by the company.

In a judgment that could bring relief to other employees at firms in the midst of GST disputes, the Bombay High Court last week struck down the demand and show cause notices issued by the Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence in the case, terming them bad and illegal.

Terming it “highly unconscionable and disproportionate” for revenue officers to hold employees responsible for liabilities of the company, a division bench of Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla held it would not be incorrect to contend that the purpose of issuing the show cause notice to the petitioner who is merely an employee, was designed to threaten and pressurize them.

GST officials had alleged that a sum of ₹1561 crore was wrongly utilized as Input Tax Credit by Maersk and those credits were wrongfully distributed. While Maersk is a foreign company which does not have any employee or fixed establishment in India, solely for the purpose of representing and acting on its behalf before the Indian tax authorities, the firm had given the power of attorney to some employees of its steamer agent in India, incorporated as Maersk Line India Pvt. Ltd.

“This ruling is significant for employees of large-sized businesses, where potentially interpretative GST positions are adopted by employees without any malafide intention. Such imposition of substantial penalties in recent investigations had caused lot of unrest amongst such employees,” an expert said.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/business/employee-gets-3731-crore-gst-penalty-demand-bombay-hc-strikes-it-down/article68025394.ece

category

Income tax department cracks down on PAN fraud for false HRA claims

editor — Wed, 03 Apr 2024 06:34:13 +0000

The income tax department has unearthed a scam involving the fraudulent use of permanent account numbers (PAN) to claim house rent allowance (HRA) without actual tenancy. Around 8,000-10,000 high-value cases, each involving amounts exceeding Rs 10 lakh, have been identified so far. The investigation was triggered by the discovery of alleged rent receipts totaling approximately Rs 1 crore attributed to an individual.

Uncovering the deception

Upon interrogation, the individual associated with the PAN linked to the purported “rental income” disavowed any knowledge of the transactions. Subsequent investigations revealed that the individual never received the reported rent payments.

Widespread misuse of PANs

The case prompted a broader probe revealing widespread misuse of PANs by unscrupulous individuals seeking tax deductions from their employers. Instances have emerged where multiple employees from the same company used identical PANs for tax claims. Tax authorities are pursuing these employees to recover the misappropriated tax amounts.

Legal implications and preventive measures

While legal action against the offenders remains uncertain, tax experts warn of potential penalties and prosecution for such fraudulent activities. To prevent such misuse, financial transactions, particularly rent payments, should be traceable and transparent, preferably through electronic means. Employers are advised to implement stringent verification processes to prevent fraudulent claims and to ensure compliance with tax regulations.

Expert insights and employer responsibilities

According to tax advisors, the responsibility primarily rests with the employee, although employers are urged to exercise due diligence in verifying HRA claims. Employers found to have lax verification processes risk reputational damage and may even terminate employees engaged in fraudulent practices.

The case underscored the imperative for vigilance and compliance in financial transactions, particularly in the realm of taxation, to prevent and penalize fraudulent activities.

Source: https://www.indiatvnews.com/business/income-tax/income-tax-department-cracks-down-on-pan-fraud-for-false-hra-claims-house-rent-allowance-authorities-rental-income-financial-transactions-2024-04-01-924080

category

Investigation of Large Corporations and Multinational Companies under GST Requires ‘Formal Authorization’

editor — Tue, 02 Apr 2024 07:46:09 +0000

The Department of Revenue has issued directives to CGST officials regarding the initiation of investigations into cases involving prominent industrial entities and multinational corporations (MNCs). These guidelines aim to streamline procedures and ensure uniformity in enforcement activities while maintaining the ease of doing business.

These guidelines outline specific scenarios where written approval from the zonal Chief Commissioner is necessary before initiating an investigation or taking action. These include cases involving large corporates, major MNCs, matters already under consideration by the GST Council, or matters seeking to impose taxes or duties on a sector, commodity, or service for the first time under Central excise or GST.

The precise definition of ‘big industrial house’ and major MNCs under these guidelines remains unclear to tax experts. Additionally, the guidelines require CGST field formations to gather details on prevailing trade practices and transaction nature from stakeholders in such cases, ensuring sufficient justification for initiating investigations and actions.

This uniform procedure was introduced following discussions by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) on the necessity for standardized enforcement procedures by CGST field formations, particularly concerning regular taxpayers and their impact on the ease of doing business.

Furthermore, tax officials are instructed to confirm whether any ongoing inquiries relate to the same subject matter or taxpayer by another investigating office or tax administration. This information must be presented to the authority responsible for approving the investigation’s initiation.

Experts believe that the directive addresses industry concerns, emphasizing the importance of effective implementation to promote tax certainty and stability in the business environment.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/now-gst-probe-into-big-corporates-major-mncs-needs-a-written-approval/article68013343.ece

category

Revenue Department is not empowered to seize Cash under GST

editor — Sat, 30 Mar 2024 10:09:45 +0000

The Delhi High Court, in the matter of Jagdish Bansal v. Union of India [W.P. (C) No. 16677 of 2023 dated February 26, 2024], granted relief to the petitioner by allowing the writ petition. The court instructed the Revenue Department to return the seized cash along with interest. The judgment emphasized that the Revenue Department lacks authority to seize cash under the applicable GST laws.

Facts of the case:

Search and seizure procedures were conducted at the premises of Jagdish Bansal, resulting in the confiscation of cash by the Revenue Department.

Displeased by this action, Jagdish Bansal filed a writ petition in the High Court, challenging the lawfulness of the cash seizure.

Issue:

The central issue at hand was whether the Revenue Department possessed the legal authority to seize cash under the GST framework.

Held:

In its ruling on W.P. (C) NO. 16677 OF 2023, the Delhi High Court made the following determinations:

Referencing the decision of the Delhi High Court in K.M Food Infrastructure Pvt Ltd Through Its Director Mukesh Kapoor Vs Director General DGGI Headquarters [W.P. (C) 328/2024 dated February 13, 2024], the court construed Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
It observed that cash does not fall under the definition of goods but rather under the definition of money as outlined in Section 2(75) of the CGST Act.
The court reiterated that cash cannot be categorized as goods and therefore cannot be subject to seizure.
It concluded that there was no valid reason for the Revenue Department to retain the seized cash.
Consequently, the court deemed the impugned order as null and directed the Revenue Department to return the seized cash along with interest.

category

Implications of Non-Compliance with GST Return Filing under Section 62 of CGST Act

editor — Tue, 26 Mar 2024 08:02:30 +0000

The Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, implemented in India in 2017, mandates registered taxpayers to regularly file returns to declare their taxable supplies and corresponding tax liabilities. However, failure to comply with this obligation can lead to significant consequences under Section 62 of the CGST Act.

Understanding Section 62 of CGST Act:

Subsection (1):

Non-Filing Obligations: This subsection comes into effect when a registered taxpayer fails to file the prescribed return under Section 39 (monthly return) or Section 45 (annual return), even after receiving notice under Section 46.
Authority of Proper Officer: The designated official empowered by the government can assess the tax liability in the absence of a return by estimating it to the best of their judgment, based on available or gathered information.
Assessment Order Issuance: The officer issues a formal assessment order (Form GST-ASMT 13) determining the estimated tax liability, interest, and any applicable penalties.
Time Limit: The assessment order must be issued within five years from the due date for filing the annual return for the relevant financial year.

Subsection (2):

Rectification Opportunity: Taxpayers have a chance to rectify non-filing by submitting a valid return within 30 days of receiving the assessment order, leading to the withdrawal of the order.
Continued Liabilities: Even if the assessment order is withdrawn, the taxpayer remains liable to pay interest and late fees as per Section 50(1) and Section 47 of the CGST Act, respectively.

Additional Provisions:

Penalties under Section 62 of CGST Act:

Interest: Interest is levied on the assessed tax liability as per Section 50(1) of the CGST Act.
Late Fees: Additional late fees are charged under Section 47 for each day of delay in filing the return.
Potential Prosecution: Severe cases of non-compliance may lead to criminal prosecution under Section 132 of the CGST Act.

Consequences of Non-Compliance under Section 62:

Key Points of Section 62:

Applicability: Applies to registered persons failing to file returns under Section 39 or Section 45.
Assessment by Proper Officer: The officer estimates tax liability based on available information within a specified time frame.
Time Limit for Assessment: Assessment can be initiated within five years from the due date for furnishing the annual return.

Relief for Non-Filers:

Conclusion:

Section 62 of the CGST Act serves as a deterrent against non-filing of GST returns, empowering authorities to assess tax liability and impose penalties. However, it also provides an opportunity for rectification within a stipulated time frame, albeit with certain consequences. Taxpayers are strongly advised to adhere to prescribed deadlines to avoid unnecessary assessments, penalties, and legal complications.

category