Skip to main content

HC upholds ICDS validity but strikes down key provisions

HC upholds ICDS validity but strikes down key provisions
The Delhi High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS), but only to the extent that they do not go against judicial pronouncements and the provisions of the IncomeTax (IT) Act.These standards played a key role in improving India´s position in the World Bank´s ease of doing business rankings, released recently.
“The ICDS is not meant to overrule the provisions of the (Income Tax) Act, the rules thereunder, and the judicial precedents applicable thereto as they stand,” said the court on Wednesday, striking down the ICDS provisions that went against judicial pronouncements and the ITAct.Hearing the petitions filed by the Chamber of Tax Consultants and others, the court also said wherever the ICDS amends the judicial pronouncements and ITprovisions, it should be brought by the legislature and not the executive.
For instance, the court struck down ICDS I, which does away with the concept of prudence,akey accounting principle to ensure assets and income are not overstated and liabilities and expenses not understated.According to this principle,acompany might provide for bad and doubtful debts based on prudence, due to a doubt regarding non-realisation of sales booked in earlier years
This is not allowed, as deduced by the ICDS.The court said, “ICDS I, which does away with the concept of ´prudence´, is contrary to the (IT) Act and binding judicial precedents and is, therefore, unsustainable in law.” Under ICDS I, expected and mark to market losses are not allowed as a deduction, even though standard accounting principles generally allow it.The court also held ICDS II ultra vires.
This standard pertains to the valuation of inventories and eliminates the distinction between a continuing partnership business and the one after a partner quits.This is contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shakti Trading Co. case, said the court.
“ICDS II is held to be ultra vires the Act and struck down as such,” it said.Ajay Singh, president of the Chamber, said the court was fair enough to restrict the powers of the Centre to notify the ICDS so far as those were contrary to judicial pronouncements and the provisions of the ITAct.
When asked whether the Chamber,a not for profit organisation with its mandate to disseminate knowledge in the field of taxation and other fields, would appeal against the court upholding the constitutional validity of the standards, he said it was still studying the finer points of the judgment.
The court also ordered against a provision in ICDS IV which requires an assessee to recognise income from export incentive in the year of making of the claim if there is “reasonable certainty” of its ultimate collection.“The ITAct provides enabling provisions to simplify computation of taxable income, thereby making the ICDS a delegated legislation.
Hence, the ICDS cannot provide for taxation which is not within the ambit of the provisions of the ITAct or accounting principles,” said Pranay Bhatia, partner, tax and regulatory services, BDO India.Amit Maheshwari of Ashok Maheswary &Associates said, “The court verdict would make the life of taxpayers simpler, and the fear that the established tax positions would be undermined is somewhat reduced.” The ICDS have 10 standards, which basically advance some income and postpone some expenses to arrive at the profitability of companies.
Earlier, tax accounting was done on a conservative basis to recognise income as and when it arose.“This is a big relief as the combination of IndAS, ICDS, and IFRS have led toalot of confusion within the industry.To my mind, ICDS should ideally be deferred till IndAS settles in,” said Girish Vanvari, partner and head –tax, KPMG India.IndAS, or Indian Accounting Standards, are adopted by Indian companies and issued by the country´s Accounting Standards Board
IFRS, or International Financial Reporting Standards, are global accounting standards issued by the IFRS Foundation and the International Accounting Standards Board.
Helped India improve on World Bank´s ease of doing business ranking
Court strikes down provisions that go against judicial pronouncements in the ITAct
Changes to judicial pronouncements and ITprovisions should come via the legislature and not the executive
ICDS comes into effect from the current assessment year –201718
ICDS advances some revenues and postpones some expenditure for taxation
The Business Standard, New Delhi, 09th November 2017


Popular posts from this blog

At 18%, GST Rate to be Less Taxing for Most Goods

About 70% of all goods and some consumer durables likely to cost less

A number of goods such as cosmetics, shaving creams, shampoo, toothpaste, soap, plastics, paints and some consumer durables could become cheaper under the proposed goods and services tax (GST) regime as most items are likely to be subject to the rate of 18% rather than the higher one of 28%.

India is likely to rely on the effective tax rate currently applicable on a commodity to get a fix on the GST slab, said a government official, allowing most goods to make it to the lower bracket.

For instance, if an item comes within the 12% excise slab but the effective tax is 8% due to abatement, then the latter will be considered for GST fitment.

Going by this formulation, about 70% of all goods could fall in the 18% bracket.

The GST Council has finalised a four-tier tax structure of 5%, 12%, 18% and 28% but has left room for the highest slab to be pegged at 40%. A committee of officials will work out the fitment and the council…

Coffee-Toffee, the GST Debate Continues

Hundreds of crores of rupees in the form of taxes ride on the exact categorisation of products Is Parachute hair oil or edible oil? Is KitKat a chocolate or a biscuit? Is a Vicks tablet medicament or confectionery? For the taxpayer and the tax collector, this is much more than an exercise in semantics -hundreds of crores of rupees ride on the exact categorisation.
As the government moves closer to rolling out the goods and services tax (GST) on July 1, many such distinctions are being debated so that no ambiguity remains. Not just that, the government is revisiting old tax cases that were lost over product categorisation, according to people with knowledge of the matter, presumably with a view to making sure that revenue collections can be maximised. “In the past, several tax officers had challenged some of the product categorisations, including those in the retail segment, but lost out in court or at appellate level,“ said one of the persons. “Now we have a chance to go ahead with speci…

Deposit gush:-CA Institute Bats for Special Audit