TIOL-DDT 2488
03.12.2014
Wednesday

THE Tax Administration Reform Commission (TARC) has submitted its Third Report to the Government.

The Commission notes that:

1. In the last ten years, direct tax collection has increased by more than 700 per cent (from Rs.69,198 crore to Rs.5,58,965 crore), but the number of taxpayers has grown by only about 35 per cent.

2.  The total number of taxpayers in the lowest income slab, (i.e. up to Rs.5 lakh) comprises 98.30 per cent of total taxpayers, from whom 10.1 per cent of the tax revenues are collected. The highest slab of above Rs.20 lakh comprises a meagre 0.38 per cent of total taxpayers, contributing 63 per cent of tax revenues.

3. In FY2008-09, the numbers of corporate taxpayers in the Rs.0-100-crore slab was 463,507 and those above Rs.500-crore slab numbered just 186 taxpayers. This suggests that the income tax base in revenue terms is very narrow and adversely affects tax buoyancy.

4. India has a low taxpayer base even as a percentage of the total population. With a population of over 120 crore, only 17 crore have a PAN and of these, about 3.6 crore file income tax returns. Only 3.3 per cent of the population pays tax, which is very low compared to 39 per cent in Singapore, 46 per cent in the USA, and 75 per cent in New Zealand.

Widen the Tax base: The Commission notes:

1. Even though widening the tax base has been one of the key action plan areas for the last several years, achievement has fallen short of targets. There, therefore, is an urgent need to enlarge the tax base as well as taxpayer base (which is not commensurate with the growth in income and wealth seen over the years) through both policy as well as enforcement action by bringing into the tax net high net worth assessees and potential tax payers.

2.  Even after allowing for agriculture households, dependent family members, and other relevant criteria, the tax base should be far larger than it is at present. It is possible to increase the number of income tax taxpayers from the present 3.5 crore to at least 6 crore. Assuming a family size of 5, there are 24 crore families in India. Assuming, further, that 30 per cent of the households earn only subsistence wages and another 20 per cent are below the income tax threshold, there will be 12 crore potential taxpayers. If one-half of this is assumed to derive income from agriculture, there will be 60 million or 6 crore potential taxpayers.

3. There is, thus, significant scope to increase the tax payer base and a lot of this increase will need to come from both increasing the tax base and ensuring true income disclosures. Widening the tax base raises equity, because if all persons liable to pay tax are brought on tax records, the burden on existing taxpayers can be brought down.

4. The overall level of compliance improves when a large number of persons who are legally required to file returns, do so. It also encourages others to comply with their legal obligation to pay their taxes dutifully

Tax Agricultural Income - TARC
Successive governments have shown a lack of political will to tax agricultural income because of the politically strong hold that agricultural lobby has over governments

THE Tax Administration Reform Commission (TARC) wants the large farmers to be taxed. The Commission observes,

Agricultural income of non-agriculturists is being increasingly used as a conduit to avoid tax and for laundering funds, resulting in leakage to the tune of crores in revenues annually. A solution could be to tax large farmers. Against a tax free limit of Rs.5 lakh on agricultural income, farmers having a high agricultural income threshold, such as Rs.50 lakhs, could be taxed. This will keep small farmers out of the purview of taxation and yet close one escape route for black money. States could pass a resolution under Article 252 of the Constitution, authorising the Centre to impose tax on agricultural income. All taxes collected by the Centre, net of collection costs, could be assigned to the states. This will broaden the taxpayer base and help mobilise additional revenue without affecting any but a very miniscule proportion of the very large farmers whose annual income exceeds the threshold limit.

For this purpose, of course, an across-the-board political consensus needs to develop, and be followed by appropriate amendments, laws and collection procedures to ensure effective implementation of such an important change. But it will certainly bring about a much improved tax culture and performance. All stakeholders need to be on board, especially representative bodies of farmers, to determine the standard parameters of expenses and receipts on production in different areas for different crops on different types of land. To do this, the existing infrastructure and human resource base of the land revenue department could be utilised. The capacity of the latter should be strengthened with proper training and infrastructure, including automating record keeping and improving transparency, to reduce fraud and forgery.

Obviously, the TARC realises that this is a fundamental structural reform proposition. Yet, successive governments have shown a lack of political will to tax agricultural income because of the politically strong hold that the agricultural lobby has over governments.

Excise duty hiked on Petrol & High Speed Diesel … again

THE Central Government has again increased the Excise duty on Motor Spirit (Petrol) & High Speed Diesel by Rs.2.25 & Rs.1.00 per litre respectively.

It was almost three weeks ago that the duty rates were increased. In fact, the above measure is only to counter balance the reduction in international crude oil prices so that nothing flows to the oil companies but to the Government as excise duty collection is already down like never before.

Analysts say that the oil glut would continue as the members of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) have decided not to cut production and this could have a profound effect on the global economy.

Interestingly, on Monday, 1st December, the oil marketing companies had cut petrol prices by 91 paise a litre, the seventh reduction since August, and on diesel by 84 paise per litre.

All this has been achieved by amending Notification 12/2012-CE. The relevant entries are as below -

Table

When this news was flashed by PTI in the afternoon we started receiving calls seeking the notification details. We could not give it as we had not received it. Even the CBEC website did not have it then.

Shouldn't the Government arms also be quick with the notification part and not merely the news part?

Notification 24/2014-CE Dated: December 2, 2014

Foreign jaunts in name of training - no free run

WHILE the Department of Expenditure has been issuing instructions from time to time on the need to curtail expenditure, especially on foreign travel, babus from the probationers to the very senior ones are enjoying their foreign excursions at Government cost.

In recent months it has been observed that Ministries/Departments have been proposing Foreign Study Tours (FSTs) of large delegations of officers as a part of training programmes. In keeping with the Government's drive on economy and rationalization of expenditure and to have an objective assessment of such FSTs, it has been decided that prior approval of the Screening Committee of Secretaries would be required for all FSTs of delegations exceeding 5 members (irrespective of level/rank of officers), where Government of India is funding such tours and which are part of career training programme(s) or stand-alone tours or otherwise.

Department of Expenditure Office Memorandum No. 7(1)/E.Coord/2014, Dated: November 25 2014

The missing Notification

IN DDT 2475 14.11.2014 we mentioned about the missing Customs notification 99/2014-CUS(NT) which may be of any date from 16.10.2014 to 31.10.2014, both days included.

It is hoped that the missing notification does not have any revenue implication. But what is the harm in making it public?

How Transparent are we?

TRANSPARENCY International's Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2014 is slated for release today and many are waiting with bated breath to know whether the country has slipped a few notches below its present 94th rank (with a paltry score of 36 out of 100) in the global clean ranking of 177 countries. More the marks, higher the ranking and corruption free the country is!

Puzzle to dazzle

OUR puzzle to dazzle column is four years old today. Silently and stealthily it has gone about its role of educating netizens on many simple they seem questions. The first puzzle carried is an evergreen one. It reads - A candidate participates in Kaun Banega Crorepati (KBC) and wins Rs 50 lakhs. At this stage he gets a choice whether to continue or not. He can go home with Rs 50 lakhs. It simply means that and income of Rs 50 lakhs has already accrued to him at this stage. Is he/she liable to tax at this stage even if he/she decides to continue with the game? If he/she continues and loses but goes home with the minimum prize of only Rs 3.2 lakhs whether he/she is ineligible for deduction of earned income of Rs 50 lakhs in view of section 58(4) of I-T Act? The question for the netizens is: Whether the contestant is liable to tax on the sum of Rs. 3.2 lakhs or on Rs.50 lakhs.

Want to know the answer? Visit Puzzle to Dazzle.

DDT wishes its sister column and the creator CA Punit Pavan Ved a happy anniversary.

Jurisprudentiol-Thursday's cases

Central Excise

Valuation - s.4 of CEA, 1944 - Appellant selling parts of pistons to their group companies - appellant, a Pvt. Ltd. Company and buyer of goods, Public Ltd. Co. cannot be called as related persons u/s 2(41) of Companies Act, 1956; they are also not inter-connected undertakings and no allegation of mutual interest has been alleged - no cause for valuation u/r 8 of Valuation Rules, 2000 - Appeal allowed: CESTAT

THE appellants are manufacturers of parts of pistons and sold the same to their group Co. on transaction value.

After introduction of Valuation Rules, 2000 the Revenue was of the opinion that since the goods were being sold to “ related persons ” the appellant is required to pay duty under Rule 8 of the same during the 01.07.2000 to 30.06.2002.

The appellant submitted that they are a Private Ltd. Company and the buyer of the goods is a Public Ltd. Co. therefore, they cannot be terms as related persons as per the definition provided in Section 2(41) of the Companies Act, 1956.

Income Tax

Whether if loan is taken from friend and repayment of same is made in cash within same FY, it can be assumed that such loan is for business exigency and not of undisclosed income - YES: HC

ASSESSEE sold certain land to these companies. AO concluded the gain on sale of lands as business income while the claim of the assessee was that it being sale/transfer of agricultural land, is not a capital asset within the meaning of Section 2(14)(iii) and is not liable to tax. AO also rejected the books of accounts by invoking provisions of section 145(3) and applied higher gross profit rate after rejecting the trading accounts.

The issues before the Bench are - issues before the Bench are - Whether lawyers holding Vakalats on behalf of their clients are under legal duty to attend the Courts/Tribunals irrespective of strike or boycott and thus, there is no reason to interfere in the order passed by the ITAT deciding the appeal ex-parte as alleged; Whether when the land sold is already converted from agricultural land to non-agricultural, it cannot be treated as agricultural land and tax will be computed on sale of the same; Whether when there was regularity of transaction with intention to make income and even within a short span of time, the lands were transferred on substantial gains, the gain arising on the same is business income and Whether assessee has introduced and recorded bogus purchases and verification of opening stock/closing stock were not open for verification in the books of accounts, books of account were rightly rejected. And the verdict goes against the assessee.

Customs

Vessel is primarily meant to be used as supply vessel and not as tug or towing vessel - classification under 8901 @nil duty is proper - Commissioner could not have added freight and insurance @21.125% as vessel had come on its own motion from Dubai - appeals allowed: CESTAT

THE Commissioner of Customs (Imports), NCH, Mumbai classified the vessel, M.V. Viva, imported by the appellant under CTH 8904 as ‘Anchor-Handling Tug/Supply Vessel' (AHTS), liable to customs duty at an effective rate of 9.356%. He also determined the value of the goods at Rs.10,29,81,975/- by holding the cost of the vessel as Rs.8,41,79,443/- and added freight @20% & cost and insurance @1.125% of the cost. Accordingly, the duty payable on the said goods was held as Rs.96,34,994/ -. Confiscation of the vessel was also ordered with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine Rs.1 crore. An equivalent penalty was imposed on the appellant and a penalty of Rs.5 lakhs on the Director of the firm.

See our Columns Thursday for the judgements

Until Thursday with more DDT

Have a nice day.

Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in