Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications Sunday, Dec 02, 2007 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment World
-
Taxation Columns - Tax Talk Deductions on transport charges
T. Banusekar Our company engages transport contractors for transportation of goods without composite contract on loading or unloading of goods. Are we required to deduct tax at source on the payment of transportation charges even though there is no contract for loading and unloading? In this connection, we would like the clarification based on Circular No 681 dated March 8, 1994, of the Board and also the decisions in Bombay Goods Transport Association vs CBDT [1994] 210 ITR 136 (Bom) and Sethi Transport v CBDT [1997] 226 ITR 274 (Orissa). — Kesavan Through Circular No 681, the Board had clarified that the term ‘transport contracts’ includes a mere contract for transportation as well. The High Courts in the decisions referred to by you had taken a view that the Circular to this extent was bad in law since Section 194C did not include a contract for mere transportation at that point in time. You may, however, note that the Finance Act 1994 has with effect from June 1, 1994, amended Section 194C to provide that even a contract for mere transportation or carriage of goods would be a work as contemplated by Section 194C. Given this amendment, the decisions of the High Courts referred to by you will no longer operate. It will therefore be required that tax be deducted at source under Section 194C even where the contract is for mere transportation of goods without there being a composite contract for loading and unloading. We had opened a demat account about three years ago. This demat account was opened in the joint names of A, B and C. A had since expired and we were informed by the depository participant that the name of A cannot be deleted from the joint account and we were advised to open a fresh account in the names of B and C alone to transmit the shares held in the joint accounts. A had willed the shares belonging to him in the demat account to B. If we are to open a new joint account, in the name of B and C, we would like to know whether the transaction would be considered as long term or short term. And we would like to know whether the capital gains would be computed from the date on which they were originally purchased or from the date on which they are transmitted to the new joint demat account — opened in the names of B and C?
We would also like to know what will be taken as the cost of acquisition of shares transferred from A to B and whether it should be taken at the original price at which it was purchased or on the market price on the date of transfer to the joint demat account of B and C? — Anil Khare Since the shares have been willed by A to B, there will be no transfer as a result of the transmission of the shares from A to B on the demise of A in the light of the specific provisions in Section 47, which provides that when a capital asset is transferred by certain modes which will include a Will, the charging provisions of Section 45 under the head capital gains will not apply. There will also be no capital gains implications on the transfer of the shares from the joint demat account of A, B and C to joint demat account of B and C. The date of acquisition of the shares and the cost will have to be reckoned as the date on which the shares were originally acquired and such acquisition price will be taken as the cost of acquisition. The market price on the date on which the shares were transferred from the joint demat account of A, B and C to the joint demat account of B and C cannot be taken as the cost of acquisition. You may, however, note that Section 45(2A) specifically provides that the cost of acquisition and the period of holding of any securities is to be determined on the first-in first-out method with reference to each demant account. I have transferred shares which were acquired by me more than three years ago under a buyback arrangement to the company which issued the shares. Since the transfer was under a buyback scheme, no securities transaction tax was paid at the time of sale. The gain, however, is a long-term capital gain since the shares were acquired more than three years ago If I were to invest the entire proceeds or gain in bonds of the Rural Electrification Corporation or HUDCO, will I be able to enjoy the tax exemption? — B.J. Prasad Since no securities transaction tax was paid at the time of transfer of the shares no exemption can be claimed by you in respect of the capital gain and the same will be chargeable to tax as long-term capital gains. The rate of tax applicable to the gain would be 20 per cent (as increased by the appropriate surcharge and additional surcharge) in accordance with Section 112 of the Act. Since the gain is long term you may, however, claim exemption under Section 54EC on reinvestment in bonds of the National Highway Authority of India or the Rural Electrification Corporation. The investment in these bonds will have to be made within six months from the date of transfer. The exemption under this Section will be to the extent of amount invested in the bonds. You may, however, note that no exemption can be claimed under this Section in respect of an amount exceeding Rs 50 lakh in a financial year. (Mail your queries to taxtalk@thehindu.co.in or by post to `Tax Talk', Business Line, Kasturi Buildings, 859, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002)More Stories on : Taxation | Tax Talk
Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page
|
Stories in this Section |
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2007, The
Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu Business Line
|