Delhi HC confirms ITAT
order holding that the amount received by assessee (engaged in providing basic
telecom services) on sale of prepaid cards to the extent of unutilized talk
time did not accrue as income in the year of sale i.e. AYs 2003-04, 2004-05
& 2009-10; Approves assessee’s mode of recognizing revenue on prepaid cards
on the basis of actual usage and carrying forward unutilized amount outstanding
on the prepaid cards to the next year in view of the matching principles for
revenue recognition as enshrined in the Accounting Standards, rejects Revenue’s
stand that assessee must account for the entire amount; However, HC states that
Revenue’s contention that the prepaid amount once paid and received by assessee
was forgone by the subscriber and accordingly appropriated by assessee is
substantially correct; At the same time, HC clarifies that “the payment was an
advance and was subject to the respondent-assessee providing basic telecom
service as promised, failing which the unutilized amount was required to be
refunded to the pre-paid subscribers” under the ordinary law of contract or
special enactments like the Consumer Protection Act; Lastly, HC rules that “unutilized
amount when the prepaid card lapses has to be treated as income or receipt of
the respondent-assessee on the date when the card had lapsed.”:HC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Big Brother is Counting: How the Taxman Knows About Your Stock Sales and FD Interest
Let’s start with a small story in this regard. Mr. A, a mid-level software engineer, felt incredibly confident about his tax return last...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
CIT vs. Kan Construction And Colonizers (P) Ltd (Allahabad High Court) The assessee sold a plot of land for Rs. 79 lakhs. The AO held th...
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
-
1. Concept of “limited liability partnership” LLP is an alternative corporate business form that gives the benefits of limited liability ...
No comments:
Post a Comment