Income Tax Jurisdiction (PAN India)

NEW JURISDICTION OF THE PR. CIT/CIT CHARGE; ADDL. CIT/ JT. CIT RANGES & ASSESSING OFFICERS / TAX RECOVERY OFFICERS OF THE PR. CHIEF CIT, STATE WISE  (click below)

http://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/Pages/jurisdiction.aspx

OFFICERS OF THE PR. CHIEF CIT, KANPUR, (UP (WEST) AND UTTARKHAND REGION), KANPUR (click below)

http://office.incometaxindia.gov.in/kanpur/Documents/Jurisdiction/jurisdiction-details.pdf



Source Income Tax Site

Supreme Court Stays Imposition of Service Tax on Lawyers

Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice H.L. Dattu, Justice A.K. Mishra and Justice Amitava Roy has stayed the Bombay High Court’s order, dated 15.12.2014 in the case of P.C. Joshi Vs. Union of India of dismissing the petition challenging levy of service tax on lawyers.
The Bombay Bar Association has challenged aforesaid order as well as the provision of Sub-clause (zzzzm) of clause (105) to Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994, which was inserted by the Finance Act, 2011.

Few of the prominent questions of law, amongst others, as framed before SC are as below:

Whether the relationship between an advocate and a litigant is that of a provider and a service recipient or whether the relationship is that of a representative and a litigant ?

Whether the impugned judgment is correct and legal in as much as levy of service tax on the provision of assistance to the court would hit the provision of justice either by the individual or a business entity as both are indisputably guaranteed under right to justice in terms of Article 21 read with Article 39A of the Constitution ?

Bombay High Court 

It is pertinent to note that Bombay High Court while dismissing the petition held that

“the taxable service means any service provided or to be provided to any person, by a business entity, in relation to advice, consultancy and assistance in any branch of law, in any manner.”

“legislature by inserting such provision has neither interfered with the role and function of an advocate nor has it made any inroad and interference in the constitutional guarantee of justice to all. The services provided to an individual client by an individual advocate continues to be exempted from the purview of the Finance Act and consequently Service Tax but when an individual advocate provides service or agrees to provide services to any business entity located in the taxable territory, then, he is included and liable to pay Service Tax.’ The judgment also notes, ‘The Advocates and legal practitioners are known to pay professional taxes and taxes on their income. They are also brought within the purview of service tax because their activities in legal field are expanding in the age of globalization, liberalization and privatization. They are not only catering to individuals but business entities.”

Source: Online

Free issue of samples is not liable for VAT

Commercial Taxes Officer vs M/s Indian Shaving Products Ltd.

(Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur)

SB Sales Tax Revision Petition no.718/1999

Date of Judgment -10/4/2015

The fundamental principle of sales tax is that there should be sale of goods involving buyer and seller, there should be transfer of property in goods from the seller to the buyer and flow of consideration from the buyer to the seller.

In case of samples issued by the assessee as a part of promotion program, first of all there is no buyer and seller, there is no transfer of property in goods and there is no consideration.

When none of the conditions are fulfilled, there is no sale as per Sales Tax/VAT Acts.

Even though Trade/Industry/Department is aware of the above statutory position, still demands are raised on free samples issued and the disputes are reaching to the level of High Court, clogging the precious time of the courts.

In a recent judgement, High Court of Rajasthan has held that free issue of samples is not liable for VAT. Observation of the High Court is as follows :-

Free samples is in accordance with trade practice and is one of the major factor where manufacture/producer can put its product in the market. Marketing through free samples is commonly accepted trade practice which one is required to resort in the competitive business environment. The revenue gains substantially when the samples are accepted over the years by the consumers who later on purchases the commodity. It is also noticed that the free samples in the instant case is negligible to the total turnover. The free samples provided to the dealer who in turn provides the same to selected consumers cannot be said to be liable for sales tax. It has no marketable value. To say that the samples provided by assessee can be held to be liable to sales tax, in my view, does not appear to be justified and Tribunal has rightly come to the said conclusion.