Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications Monday, Jul 23, 2007 ePaper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mentor
-
Income Tax Industry & Economy - Income Tax Columns - For the Asking Substance of return more important than Form
I submitted my income-tax (I-T) return for the assessment year 2007-08 in the last week of April 2007 in the old 2D Form showing ‘nil’ taxable income after deduction under Section 80C. Will I have to submit my return again in the new ITR 2 form for AY 2007-08. I had income under ‘other sources’ and notional annual value under ‘property income’ but ‘nil’ taxable income. Some chartered ac countants maintain that I have to re-submit the return in the new form while others say that a return submitted in the old 2D Form and accepted, then another return in the new form need not be submitted. Kindly clarify. V. Kumar, email
There are quite a few case laws to support the argument that substance is more important than form. Therefore, submission of return in an old Form is not fatal so long as it gives all the information to the assessing officer (AO) to make a proper assessment. At any rate, nothing stopped the Department from refusing to accept returns in old forms. Rest assured you are in the clear. Speculative transaction
If I trade in derivatives in a stock exchange would that amount to a speculative transaction? Velingiri Parasuppa, email
The position is made clear by Proviso (d) to Section 43(5) defining the term ‘speculative transaction’. It says an eligible transaction of trading in derivatives carried out in a recognised stock exchange shall not be treated as a speculative transaction. Audited accounts
At number of places, the Companies Act talks of ‘audited accounts’. Does this presuppose accounts as audited and signed by directors or approved byshareholders as well? Murali Manohar, email
The Companies Act is not explicit about whether the accounts as audited need to be approved by shareholders at the AGM. Section 210 calls upon the board to lay the accounts before the AGM. But Section 173, while distinguishing between ordinary and special businesses, categorises ‘consideration’ of accounts under the ordinary category impliedly thus fortifying the legislative expectation if not the mandate that the shareholders must cast their imprimatur on the accounts. This inference flows from the use of the word ‘consideration’ in Section 173. A document when ‘considered’ obviously would have to be either approved or disapproved. Thus, the implicit requirement is that the shareholders must approve the accounts laid at the AGM. But, in my view, this does not mean that lack of approval by the shareholders would in any way impinge on provisions talking about audited accounts. Rental income
I had purchased a residential site from an urban development authority in June 2006 by borrowing from a bank. While taking the loan I had mentioned that I would start construction within a year and was hence sanctioned a housing loan instea d of a plot loan and at the instance of the bank I made my wife a joint owner though she does not have any regular source of income. Immediately after the purchase I was approached by a local trader to let the place to run his business after erecting a temporary structure. I agreed and let it on nominal rent. Now, I have decided not to go ahead with constructing a house as a lot of infrastructure development activity is taking place around the site and it is fast developing into a commercial area. Under which head should I disclose the rental income and will I be eligible for deduction on the interest, and if I have a loss from this transaction, can it be offset against my income from salary? Also should the rental income be split between me and my wife though the loan instalment and interest are paid out of my salary income? Srinath, email
The rental income is assessable as income from house property. If you are the 100 per cent owner of the property, the income would be completely assessed in your hands though your wife has been co-opted by the bank has a joint borrower. In the event, you would get all the deductions relating to the loan to the exclusion of your wife. S. MURLIDHARAN Income Tax | Income Tax | For the Asking
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
|