News Update

India, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonI-T - Income so surrendered on account of investment in excess stock during course of survey cannot be brought to tax under deeming provisions of section 69B: ITATMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilI-T-Power of revision need not be exercised where facts do not reveal any lack of enquiry by AO into relevant issue & when twin requirements of order being erroneous as well as prejudicial to Revenue's interests, are not satisfied: ITATThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageI-T -Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed where an assessee claims deduction u/s 80P while being ineligible therefor, but being under the bona fide impression of being eligible for such benefit : ITATYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingCus - Enhancement of declared value of imported goods is not tenable, where Department adduces no material to show how the enhanced value was computed & where no cogent rationale is made out for rejecting declared value: CESTATMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionST - When the facts are in the knowledge of department subsequent SCN alleging suppression cannot be issued and entire demand was found beyond normal period of limitation: CESTATFM Nirmala Sitharaman declines to contest LS elections as she has no fundsST - Tripura State Rifles not required to pay Service Tax under heading of Security Services, as it is is not engaged in business of providing security services: CESTATJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of LokpalCX - Clandestine removal alleged based on consumption of raw inputs and heightened electricity usage - Tax demands based on third party statements but without permitting cross examination of deponents; case remanded to allow this exercise: CESTAT
 
I-T - Allotment of Stock Appreciation Rights is distinct from allotment of shares, so not taxable as Capital Gains: SC

 

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, APRIL 26, 2018: THE ISSUE AT HAND BEFORE THE APEX COURT WAS - Whether where the allotment of Stock Appreciation Rights to an assessee as a perquisite, is distinct from allotment of shares, and thus not taxable as Capital Gains. YES IS THE ANSWER.

Facts of the case

The assessee, an individual, is the chairperson and managing director of Proctor & Gamble India, a leading FMCG brand. In his returns filed for the relevant AY he declared his total income of about Rs 40 lakhs. However, on assessment, the AO determined the assessee's total income at about Rs 7.2 crores. Later, the CIT(A) upheld the findings of the AO. On subsequent appeal, the Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal, whereupon both the assessee as well as the Revenue preferred appeals before the High Court.

Meanwhile the AO sought to recover tax on the differential amount, and held that the differential sum paid to the assessee by P&G, USA would be treated as capital gains on transfer or redemption of shares, and so the assessee was liable to pay tax on capital gains. Against such order the assessee again approached the CIT(A), who once again dismissed the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal too confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A). Against such Tribunal order, the assessee filed no appeal. Thereupon, the High Court settled the first appeal in favor of the assessee.

On hearing the matter, the Apex Court was of the view that,

++ considering the CBDT Circular No. 710 dated 24.07.1995, which deals with the taxability of shares issued at less than the market price, it appears that such Circular dealt with the cases where the employer issued shares to the employees at less than the market price. In the instant case, the assessee was allotted Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs.) by the (P&G) USA which is different from the allotment of shares. Hence, in the opinion of this court such Circular has no applicability on the instant case. Moreover, a Circular cannot be used to introduce a new tax provision in a Statute which was otherwise absent;

++ considering the provisions of Section 28(iv) of the Act, it is apparent that such benefit or perquisite shall have arisen from the business activities or profession whereas in the instant case there is nothing as such. The applicability of Section 28(iv) is confined only to the case where there is any business or profession related transaction involved. Hence, the instant case cannot be covered under Section 28(iv) of the IT Act for the purpose of tax liability.

(See 2018-TIOL-162-SC-IT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023