CA Online

Event Date Act Applicable Form Obligation 07/05/2019 Income Tax Challan No. ITNS-281 Payment of TDS Deducted in April 11/05/2019 Goods and Service Tax GSTR-1 Outward supplies of taxable goods and/or services for the Month of April 2019 turnover exceeding 1.5 Cr.) Monthly Return. 13/05/2019 Goods and Service Tax GSTR-6 Return by Input Service Distributor 15/05/2019 Providend Fund Electronic Challan cum Return (ECR) E-Payment of PF for Apr 15/05/2019 ESI ESI Challan Payment of ESI of Apr 15/05/2019 Income Tax Return No. 27EQ TCS Return of all collectors for March Quarter 15/05/2019 Income Tax Form No.27C (TCS) Exemption from TCS 15/05/2019 Income Tax Form No. 16 B Due date for issue of TDS Certificate for tax deducted under Section 194-IA in the month of March, 2019 20/05/2019 Goods and Service Tax GSTR-3B GSTR return for the month of April 2019 30/05/2019 Income Tax Form - 49C Statement by No

Data confidentiality part of pact The Income Tax Department will now share information — such as reported turnover and gross income declared — with the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to check tax evasion.  The I-T Department and GSTN will enter an agreement on the modalities of information sharing. The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has said the agreement will include provisions for confidentiality, a mechanism for safe preservation of data and timelines for furnishing information. CBDT has left the onus of data-sharing on the principal director general of income tax (systems) or director general of income tax (systems). “Spontaneous exchange of data (is in the works), the modalities of which shall be decided by the concerned specified authorities,” an order issued by the CBDT said.  Details captured in returns, status of filing income tax returns (ITR) and turnover ratio will form part of the information package to be shared with GSTN. The data can be matched with t

Contributions to EPS limited and is not adequate to pay a higher pension, says EPFO The Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) plans to move the Supreme Court to review a high court order that allowed workers to draw pension on a wage above the current salary ceiling of  Rs. 15,000 per month.  The current monthly contribution toward employees pension scheme (EPS) is limited and is not adequate to pay a higher pension, according to the retirement fund body. Any binding order on it will make the organisation financially unviable, two government officials said requesting anonymity. “We are readying for a review petition. Pension contribution by EPFO subscribers is based on a  Rs. 15,000 salary ceiling. If pension outgo is calculated on the total salary above the  Rs. 15,000 threshold, it will be tough to maintain. It will be a negative cash flow and we may fall short of several thousand crores every year,” said one of the two officials mentioned above. At present, every mont

India Inc could face a tax landmine with authorities beginning to question input tax credit claimed by companies in lieu of Goods and Services Tax paid by their vendors.  The authorities have already started sending notices to businesses, confirming fears that scrutiny will increase in the new financial year as the government looks to plug leakages. Experts said notices have been sent in Gujarat, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana and some other states. The issue has its origin in the provisions of the GST law that warrant a reversal of input tax credit claimed by a business if its vendor has not paid the tax for which credit is being claimed.  Currently, there is no mechanism to ascertain if vendors have paid GST. The GST Network Portal allows viewing of the return-filing status of a registered person, but payment of tax cannot be determined. At best, buyers can only verify whether vendors have included the invoice in their GST filings. Effectively, while a business may have pai

India Inc could face a tax landmine with authorities beginning to question input tax credit claimed by companies in lieu of Goods and Services Tax paid by their vendors. The authorities have already started sending out notices to businesses, confirming fears that scrutiny will increase in the new financial year as the government looks to plug leakages. Experts said notices have been sent in Gujarat, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana and some other states. The Economic Times, 30th April 2019

Market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) is once again caught on the wrong foot, and this time for one of its recent circulars that  made public names of over 2,000 entities, which have defaulted on its dues. Some of the companies named in the list have raised objections with the finance ministry, stating that the list was erroneous, said sources aware of the  development.  The regulator had pulled out the circular dated 2 April within hours without any explanation. But, the uncertainty and confusion among market players,  triggered by the list, lingered. The list featured some prominent names like SBI Capital, Axis Capital, GMR Holdings, United Breweries, Alpic Finance (a Cipla group unit), Saradha Realty,  United Bank of India and Trident India. “Putting our name on the defaulter list has sent a wrong message to our shareholders. It has affected the company image,” said the official of a company  whose name was on the list. An executive with another firm sai

The Supreme Court on Friday reprimanded the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for refusing to disclose information pertaining to the annual inspection report on  banks under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, and warned that any further attempts by the banking sector regulator to hold back such information “shall be  viewed seriously by the court”. Though the apex court held the RBI in contempt of court, it gave the regulator “one last opportunity” to withdraw the disclosure policy related to the  annual inspection report on banks. The RBI, the court held, was “duty-bound under the law” to provide such information, which was otherwise exempted under  law. “Though we could have taken a serious view of the respondents continuing to violate the directions issued by this court, we give them a last  opportunity to withdraw the disclosure policy insofar as it contains exemptions which are contrary to the directions issued by this court,” a two-judge  Bench of Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justi