Taxation

23/03/2022

Industrial area development – Whether ITC is allowed on construction?

ARA, Rajasthan has pronounced Ruling on 16.2.2021, in the case of Rajasthan State Indusl. Dev. & Investment Corpn. Ltd. (2022) 37 J.K.Jain’s GST & VR 210, that;
ITC claim on the input services for construction or works contract procured for the development of an industrial area or the special maintenance expenses of the area, is not allowed.

Background.─ 1.The applicant is a Rajasthan State Govt. owned Public Sector Undertaking. The corporation (RIICO) has been setup by the Rajasthan Govt. for the purpose of development of various industrial areas for the purpose of setting up of Industries and other supportive services in the State of Rajasthan. It has total 30 regional offices all across the State of Rajasthan for the purpose of development, improvement, up-gradation and maintenance of various Industrial areas in various regions.

2. The applicant for the development of industrial areas in the various regions of the Rajasthan for the purpose of setting of Industries first identifies the suitable Govt./private land. Thereafter applicant starts the acquisition process of such land and later planning for the development of such land. After that for the purpose of getting land developed, the applicant prepares a detailed project report for the purpose of mapping of entire area, for estimating the cost of the development and to plan the development of such area.

3. The applicant has stated that they acquires the raw/undeveloped land, the applicant has to initially carry out the development work like levelling of the land, development of the basic amenities like construction of roads, drainage system, boundary wall, water and power supply system, dumping yard and various other types of related development works. In this connection the applicant prepares a Detailed Project Report (DPR) which includes the details of the area to be developed, Map of the entire area which is to be developed and the cost estimation for the development of the area. Based on that, approval is taken from the Board. After development of a new industrial area, applicant also shoulders responsibility of maintenance/upkeep of infrastructure as well as upgradation of infrastructure from time to time in future.

4. Since the applicant carries out the development work of an area after acquiring raw land from the State Govt. In this connection it is to be submitted that after the development work, the plot of the land is allotted on 99 years lease to the various persons who applies for the same. In the area developed by the applicant, certain part of the area is demarcated as to be used for Non-industrial purpose which can be allotted for commercial/institutional/residential purpose and is supportive to the industrial projects. It is not disputed that the goods or services or both obtained by the applicant are in the course or furtherance of business.

5. Analysis by ARA.─5.Subject to the conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed, the taxpayer entitled to take ITC on the tax charged on any supply of goods or services or both which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of business as per S.16(1), CGST Act, 2017 which reads as under:–

S.16.“Eligibility and conditions for taking ITC.─(1) Every registered person shall, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed and in the manner specified in S.49, be entitled to take credit of input tax charged on any supply of goods or services or both to him which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of his business and the said amount shall be credited to the electronic credit ledger of such person.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, no registered person shall be entitled to the credit of any input tax in respect of any supply of goods or services or both to him unless,………………………
(a) he is in possession of a tax invoice or debit note issued by a supplier registered under this Act, or such other taxpaying documents as may be prescribed;
(b) he has received the goods or services or both.”
Thus, S.16(1), CGST Act specifically provides that every registered person shall be entitled to take credit of the input tax charged on any supply of goods or services or both made to him, which are used or intended to be used in the course or furtherance of his business. Such entitlement is subject to fulfillment of certain conditions such as possession of invoice, receipt of goods/service, payment of tax to Govt. etc. as provided u/s 16(2) of the GST Act, 2017. However, the availability of credit is subject to the restrictions as stipulated u/s 17(5)(d), GST Act, 2017.

6. The relevant provisions of S.17(5)(d), CGST Act reads as under: “(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in S.16(1), and S.18(1), ITC shall not be available in respect of the following, namely:–(a)…..(b)…..

(c) works contract services when supplied for construction of an immovable property (other than plant and machinery) except where it is an input service for further supply of works contract service;

(d) goods or services or both received by a taxable person for construction of an immovable property (other than plant or machinery) on his own account including when such goods or services or both are used in the course or furtherance of business.
Explanation.–For the purposes of clauses (c) and (d), the expression “construction” includes re-construction, renovation, additions or alterations or repairs, to the extent of capitalization, to the said immovable property;

Explanation–For the purposes of this Chapter and Chapter VI, the expression “plant and machinery” means apparatus, equipment, and machinery fixed to earth by foundation or structural support that are used for making outward supply of goods or services or both and includes such foundation and structural supports but excludes–

(i) land, building or any other civil structures; (ii) telecommunication towers; and (iii) pipelines laid outside the factory premises.”

7. Section 17(5)(c) and (d) of the CGST Act, 2017 denies availment of ITC on works contract service and on goods and services when supplied for construction of an immovable property (other than plant and machinery) on his own account including when such goods or services or both are used in the furtherance of business. Applicant does not deny that the civil work i.e., roads drainage, approaches, culverts, rain water harvesting system, power supply related work like laying of new power lines, street light work, work for common facilities in the industrial area like Administrative office, building for fire tenders, Post office/Bank building etc. is an immovable property. In fact, they have obtained land from State Govt./private land and after the development work, the land is allotted on lease to the various persons who applies for the same. We find that as per S.5(c) and 5(d) of S.17 of CGST Act, 2017 the ITC will not be allowed for works contract service and on the goods and service used by the taxable person on his own account. S.17(5)(c) clearly states that no ITC would be available on the tax paid on works contract services when supplied for construction of an immovable property (other than plant and machinery) except where it is an input.
Findings by ARA.─8. It is admitted by the appellant that they are getting civil works done from the contractor. On perusal of fact submitted by the appellant, we find that the appellant has constructed roads drainage, approaches, culverts, rain water harvesting system, power supply related work like laying of new power lines, street light work, work for common facilities in the industrial area like Administrative office, building for fire tenders, Post office/Bank building etc. on the land for leasing the same to other. All the civil construction undertaken by the appellant is certainly an immovable property in the first place in terms of S.3(26) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 which reads as under– “Immovable Property shall include land, benefits to arise out of land and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth.” 8. Further, S.(17)(5)(d) bars a taxable person, in the subject case the applicant, from taking ITC for construction of immovable property (as in the subject case) which is on his own account, even when such goods or services or both are used in the course or furtherance of business (in the subject case, Leasing of the said property). Further, it is also seen from the submissions that the immovable property in the subject case is not a plant or machinery. Thus we find that, S.17(5)(d) provides that no ITC is available in respect of any goods or services received by a taxable person for construction of an immovable property on his own account even if such inputs and input services are used in the course and furtherance of business. In the instant case the applicant has himself built the immovable property for which he has received various goods or services or both and is using the said property for giving the same on long term leasing to his customers. Therefore, as per S.17(5)(d), no ITC is available on any goods or services received by him for such construction and the same cannot be claimed by him. Thus, the provisions of S.(17)(5)(d) squarely applies in the subject case and thus the applicant cannot avail ITC.

9. Further also the ITC is not allowed on the work contract services when supplied for construction of an immovable property except when such services are received for the construction of plant and machinery. Similarly, ITC is not allowed on goods or services or both received by a taxable person for the purpose of construction of an immovable property except when the same are used for the construction of plant and machinery. However, the explanation gives a clarity that ITC on work contract service when supplied for construction of immovable property and goods or services or both received by a taxable person for construction of an immovable property is not allowed only to the extent of capitalisation. But in this case the applicant argued that entire expenses incurred on the development and maintenance of the areas including GST charged by the contractor in the profit and loss account as revenue expenditure and it is not a capital expenditure, we do not agree with the applicant’s view that the land development work on immovable property is not a capital expenditure. The term ‘extent to which capitalized’, only suggests that the extent of such expenses are expected to be capitalized or else will be treated as capitalized to such immovable property. Since, the work done by the applicant on the acquired land is not of the nature of any type of repair or maintenance on immovable property, but a new fixed asset is constructed and it appreciate the value of the property/land. Hence, such expenses, which enhance the value of the property permanently and as per accounting convention, the expenditure are capital in nature, has to be capitalized and cannot be treated as revenue expenditure. The applicant’s contention cannot be accepted. Therefore, as per S.17(5)(c) & (d), CGST/RGST Act, 2017, No ITC is available to the applicant.
10. Further, the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble High Court Orissa in the case of Chief Commissioner of CGST v. Safari Retreats Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 33 J.K.Jain’s GST & VR 201 (SC), (supra). In the said case it is seen that the party had constructed malls which were given further on lease. While holding that S.17(5)(d) was not ultra vires, the Hon’ble Court ruled that the party was eligible for credit.
11. However, we find that the department has filed an appeal against the said judgment of the Hon’ble Orissa High Court, in case of Safari Retreats Pvt. Ltd. v. Chief Commissioner of CGST (2019) 31 J.K.Jain’s GST & VR 429 which is presently pending. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Union of India v. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd.(2004) 164 E.L.T. 375 (SC), has held that once a special leave to appeal is granted and appeal is admitted, correctness or otherwise of judgment of Tribunal becomes wide open and in such appeal, Court is entitled to go into both questions of fact and as well as law and correctness of judgment is in jeopardy. Appeal is considered to be a continuation of suit and a decree becomes executable only when the same is disposed by the final Court of Appeal. Conclusion by ARA.─12. Hence in view of the above, we are of the opinion that since the case of Safari Retreats Pvt. Ltd. is pending with the Hon’ble Supreme Court, has not attained finality. We also find that the Hon’ble High Court has given the relief to the party invoking its writ jurisdiction while categorically holding that they are not inclined to hold S.17(5)(d) to be ultra vires. Therefore, we are not relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court.
12. In view of the above discussions and finding, we rule as under: Ruling by ARA.─For reasons as discussed in the body of the order, the questions are answered thus– Question : Whether the applicant can claim the ITC on the input services of construction or works contract procured for the development of an industrial area or the special maintenance expenses or the area? Answer : Answered in the negative.

01/03/2022

Clarification regarding the Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) clause in the Protocol to India’s DTAAs with certain countries - Reg.

The Protocol to India’s Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) with some of the countries, especially European States and OECD members (The Netherlands, France, the Swiss Confederation, Sweden, Spain and Hungary) contains a provision, referred to as the Most-Favoured-Nation (MFN) clause. Though each MFN clause in these DTAAs has a different formulation, the general underlying provision is that if after the signature/ entry into force (depending upon the language of the MFN clause) of the DTAA with the first State, India enters into a DTAA with another OECD Member State, wherein India limits its source taxation rights in relation to certain items of income (such as dividends, interest income, royalties, Fees for Technical Services, etc.) to a rate lower or a scope more restricted than the scope provided for those items of income in the DTAA with the first State, such beneficial treatment should also be extended to the first State.

2. The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has received representations seeking clarity on the applicability of the MFN clause (particularly to dividend withholding rates) available in the Protocol to some of the DTAAs with OECD member States. India’s DTAAs with countries, namely Slovenia, Colombia and Lithuania, provide for lower rate of source taxation with respect to certain items of income. However, these States were not members of the OECD at the time of the conclusion of their DTAAs with India and have become members of the OECD thereafter.

3. Reference is drawn to the decree issued by the Directorate General for Fiscal Affairs, International Fiscal Affairs, Netherlands (Decree No IFZ 2012/54M dated 28th February 2012) (hereinafter referred to as “the decree”), the French official bulletin of Public finances-Taxes (Bulletin Officiel des Finances Publiques-Impots) published by DGFIP on 4th November, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “the bulletin “) and the publication by the Federal Department of Finance, the Swiss Confederation on 13th August, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “the publication”). The unilateral decree/bulletin of The Netherlands and France declare that the tax rate on dividends under their respective DTAAs with India stands modified under the MFN clause after India entered into a DTAA with Slovenia, which became a member of the OECD on 215tJuly, 2010. The DTAA has a lower tax rate of 5% if the holding is above 10%. It has been further stated in the decree/bulletin that the lower rate will be applicable retrospectively from the date Slovenia became member of the OECD. Similarly, the unilateral publication of the Swiss Confederation declares that the tax rate on dividends under their DTAA with India stands modified under the MFN clause after India entered into a DTAA with Lithuania and Colombia who became members of the OECD on 5th July, 2018 and 28th April, 2020 respectively. The publication further states that the lower rate of 5% will be applicable for holding above 10% retrospectively from 5th July, 2018 (i.e. date of Lithuania joining the OECD) and for dividends arising from qualified interests and portfolio dividends retrospectively from 28th April, 2020 (i.e. date of Colombia joining the OECD).

4. In view of the above-mentioned decree/bulletin/publication on interpretation of the MFN clauses and the representations received from the taxpayers and field formation seeking clarity, the CBDT hereby issues the following clarifications on the applicability of the MFN clause:
4.1 Unilateral decree/bulletin/publication do not represent shared understanding of the treaty partners on applicability of the MFN clause: Both The Netherlands and France have passed the said decree/bulletin without having any bilateral consultation with India. Therefore, these decree/ bulletin do not represent the shared understanding of India and the respective treaty partners on the applicability of the MFN clause and have no binding force as far as interpretation of MFN clause in the respective treaties is concerned. At best these unilateral decree/bulletin only represent the views of the respective governments for providing relief from The Netherlands/France tax. Since these decree/bulletin were passed without any discussion with the Government of India, it would not have any effect on curtailing the tax liability that is payable to the Government of India under the respective tax treaty.
4.1.1 India has also communicated its position to The Netherlands and France that the decree/bulletin in question is not in accordance with the object and purpose enshrined in the respective DTAAs and that the lower tax rate in the India-Slovenia treaty cannot be imported into these treaties by virtue of the MFN clause as Slovenia was not a member of the OECD when India had entered into DTAA with it. Reliance on the mere fact that Slovenia is an OECD member State at the time of applicability of the MFN clause defeats the object and purpose of the MFN clause. There has been no response from The Netherlands and France to India’s interpretation of MFN clause conveyed to them.

4.1.2 In the case of the Swiss Confederation, India has communicated its position that the benefits of India’s DTAA with the third State cannot be imported into the India-Swiss DTAA unless the third State was a member of the OECD at the time of signing that treaty.
4.2 Conditionality for the third State being a member of the OECD on the date of conclusion of the DTAA: On a plain reading of the MFN clauses in India’s DTAAs especially with respect to the above-mentioned countries, it is clear that there is a requirement that the third State is to be a member of the OECD both at the time of conclusion of the treaty with India as well as at the time of applicability of MFN clause. Therefore, it is clarified that for applicability of the MFN clause, the third State has to be an OECD member State on the date of conclusion of DTAA with India.
4.3 Application of concessional rates/restricted scope from the date of entry into force of the DTAA with the third State and not from the date the third State becomes member of the OECD: It may also be pointed out that the MFN clause in these DTAAs clearly states that the reduced rate takes effect from the date of entry into force of Indian DTAA with the third State. Thus, the declaration in the decree/bulletin/publication of The Netherlands, France and the Swiss Confederation to make the reduced rate effective from the date of the third State becoming member of OECD subsequent to entry into force of a DTAA is not in accordance with the relevant provision of the MFN clause in the Protocol. In fact, these countries could not have made it effective from the date of entry into force of Indian DTAA with the third State as the third State was not a member of the OECD on such date of entry into force. This makes it clear that the intention of the MFN clause in the Protocol of the DTAAs is not to give the benefit of India’s DTAA with the third State which was not a member of OECD when India entered into DTAA with it. In this regard, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Jethmalani & Others (writ petition civil no 176 of 2009) had observed that :
“61. This Court in Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan approvingly noted Frank Bennion’s observations that a treaty is really an indirect enactment, instead of a substantive legislation, and that drafting of treaties is notoriously sloppy, whereby inconveniences obtain. In this regard this Court further noted the dictum of Lord Widgery, C.J. that the words “are to be given their general meaning, general to lawyer and layman alike…. The meaning of the diplomat rather than the lawyer.” The broad principle of interpretation, with respect to treaties, and provisions therein, would be that ordinary meanings of words be given effect to, unless the context requires or otherwise. However, the fact that such treaties are drafted by diplomats, and not lawyers, leading to sloppiness in drafting also implies that care has to be taken to not render any word, phrase, or sentence redundant, especially where rendering of such word, phrase or sentence redundant would lead to a manifestly absurd situation, particularly from a constitutional perspective. The government cannot bind India in a manner that derogates from Constitutional provisions, values and imperatives.” (emphasis supplied)

Thus, one cannot ignore the clear wording of the MFN clause which mandates the application of lower rate from the date of entry into force of the Indian DTAA with the third State. All three countries have in effect through their unilateral decree/bulletin/publication made this part of the MFN clause redundant which according to the above Indian Supreme Court judgment cannot be done. The above-mentioned decree/bulletin/publication have no application so far as taxation liability of a person in India is concerned.

4.4 Requirement of notification under Section 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961: Further, it is a domestic requirement in India under sub-section (1) of section 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 that DTAA or amendment to DTAA are implemented after its notification in the Official Gazette. In the famous case of Azadi Bachao Andolan (2004, 10 SCC) as well, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has observed that the DTAA provisions come into force on the date of issue of notification of such DTAA. Hon’ble Supreme Court also made it clear in the judgment that the beneficial provision of sub-section (2) of section 90 springs into operation once the notification is issued. The relevant extract of that judgment reads as under
“A survey of the aforesaid cases makes it clear that the judicial consensus in India has been that section 90 is specifically intended to enable and empower the Central Government to issue a notification for implementation of the terms of a double taxation avoidance agreement. When that happens, the provisions of such an agreement, with respect to cases to which where they apply, would operate even if inconsistent with the provisions of the Income-tax Act. We approve of the reasoning in the decisions which we have noticed. If it was not the intention of the legislature to make a departure from the general principle of chargeability to tax under section 4 and the general principle of ascertainment of total income under section 5 of the Act, then there was no purpose in making those sections “subject to the provisions of the Act”. The very object of grafting the said two sections with the said clause is to enable the Central Government to issue a notification under section 90 towards implementation of the terms of the DTAs which would automatically override the provisions of the Income- tax Act in the matter of ascertainment of chargeability to income tax and ascertainment of total income, to the extent of inconsistency with the terms of the DTAC………. …………………………………………….. This Court is not concerned with the manner in which tax treaties are negotiated or enunciated; nor is it concerned with the wisdom of any particular treaty. Whether the Indo-Mauritius DTAC ought to have been enunciated in the present form, or in any other particular form, is none of our concern. Whether section 90 ought to have been placed on the statute book, is also not our concern. Section 90, which delegates powers to the Central Government, has not been challenged before us, and, therefore, we must proceed on the footing that the section is constitutionally valid. The challenge being only to the exercise of the power emanating from the section, we are of the view that section 90 enables the Central Government to enter into a DTAC with the foreign Government. When the requisite notification has been issued thereunder, the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 90 spring into operation and an assessee who is covered by the provisions of the DTAC is entitled to seek benefits thereunder, even if the provisions of the DTAC are inconsistent with the provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961.” (emphasis supplied)

4.4.1 It may be noted that India has not issued any notification importing the benefit of treaties with Slovenia, Lithuania and Colombia to treaties with The Netherlands, France or the Swiss Confederation.
4.5 No selective import of concessional rates under MFN clause: Without prejudice to the above discussion, it may be further noted that some jurisdictions have been selective in invoking and applying the MFN clause, which the provisions of the treaty, read with the Rules of interpretation of international treaties do not permit. India’s treaties with Slovenia and Lithuania consist of a split rate of tax for dividends. Article 10(2) of the India-Lithuania treaty is being reproduced here: “However, such dividends may also be taxed in the Contracting State of which the company paying the dividends is a resident and according to the laws of that State, but if the beneficial owner of the dividends is a resident of the other Contracting State, the tax so charged shall not exceed:
(a) 5 per cent of the gross amount of the dividends if the beneficial owner is a company (other than a partnership) which holds directly at least 10 per cent of the capital of the company paying the dividends;
(b) 15 per cent of the gross amount of the dividends in all other cases. “ A plain reading of the above extract leads to the inference that the beneficial rate of 5% on Dividend income is applicable only if the company (other than a partnership) receiving the dividends holds directly at least 10% of the capital of the company paying the dividends. The same was also communicated to the authorities of The Netherlands, France and the Swiss Confederation. Even though The Netherlands, France and the Swiss Confederation have taken this into account in their decree/bulletin/publication by providing that the rate of 5% will be applicable only when the condition of 10% ownership is satisfied, there is no sound rationale/basis provided for the selective import on account of not switching to 15% tax rate in other cases. The concern expressed by India to these countries, on this issue, has remained unaddressed.

5. In view of the above, it is hereby clarified that the applicability of the MFN clause and benefit of the lower rate or restricted scope of source taxation rights in relation to certain items of income (such as dividends, interest income, royalties, Fees for Technical Services, etc.) provided in India’s DTAAs with the third States will be available to the first (OECD) State only when all the following conditions are met:
(i) The second treaty (with the third State) is entered into after the signature/ Entry into Force (depending upon the language of the MFN clause) of the treaty between India and the first State;
(ii) The second treaty is entered into between India and a State which is a member of the OECD at the time of signing the treaty with it;
(iii) India limits its taxing rights in the second treaty in relation to rate or scope of taxation in respect of the relevant items of income; and
(iv) A separate notification has been issued by India, importing the benefits of the second treaty into the treaty with the first State, as required by the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
If all the conditions enumerated in Paragraph 5(i) to (iv) are satisfied, then the lower rate or restricted scope in the treaty with the third State is imported into the treaty with an OECD State having MFN clause from the date as per the provisions of the MFN clause in the DTAA, after following the due procedure under the Indian tax law.

6. Notwithstanding the clarification given in the above paragraphs, where in the case of a taxpayer there is any decision by any court on this issue favourable to such taxpayer this Circular will not affect the implementation of the court order in such case.

Circular No. 3/2022 Circular No 3 2022 F No 503 1 2021 FTTR I Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Direct Taxes FTTR I New Delhi 3rd Febru

16/08/2020

Implication of new 26AS Form of Income Tax

Background:

On 18July20, Income Tax Dept informed that new 26AS form is implemented

New 26AS will now include certain high value transactions explained How does it impact u is what this explains

First let's start with basics

Q: What is Form 26AS Form?

Ans: Till now Form 26AS, was a statement that IT dept used to provide u to capture

(a) TDS deducted from u (For eg: Ur company deducting TDS on ur salary)
(b) TCS: Tax collected at source (house property etc)

Now what has changed?

Now Form 26AS, will have a new section known as Section E

Section E will also capture certain high value transactions that you do in a financial year

So at a glance it will help u see you large txns in a year. And we explain below which txns

Q: Tell me which txns & what do u mean by large txns (how large?)

Ans: For eg: if u invest in a mutual fund > 10 lacs in a year. That is a large txn and it will be captured in this statement

Not a single txn, but cumulative in a year if in a single MF u invest > 10 lacs

Q: Ok I get it, tell me more which all txns will be included?

Ans: 14 types of txns are included and here is the full list:

1) Fixed Deposits together in Bank > 10 lacs in a year

2) Credit Card Bills > 10 lacs (in a year) if paid by cheque
and > 1 lacs if paid by cash

3) If u buy bonds > 10 lacs in a year

4) If u buy shares > 10 lacs in a year

5) If u tender shares for buyback > 10 lacs in a year

6) If u buy Fx > 10 lacs in a year

7) If u buy MFs > 10 lacs in a year

😎 Real Estate > 30 lacs

9) Purchase of Bank drafts > 10 lacs with cash

10) If u deposit cash in savings bank account > 10 lacs

11) Cash deposts or withdrawals from current account > 10 lacs

And some other routine ones (related to demonetisation)

All this will be shown in Section E in your Form 26AS of your previous years also!

Q: How does all this impact us?

Ans For honest tax payers, it is actually beneficial. Now we have a single point source of all large txns which will help us.

For those who evaded taxes - earlier also IT dept knew it - Now it is putting it in their face and telling IT knows

Q: So does it mean u should do txns < 10 lacs. For eg: Make a FD < 10 lacs or split it to keep those below 10 lakh?

Ans: First, this is not single txn value. Anyways all ur FDs (or other txns as detailed above) will be cumulatively (in a single bank) looked at,
So no point trying to make smaller txns or splitting it.

Q: I am worried will IT dept harass me now, if I spend too much on credit cards?

Ans: Again, honest tax payers need not worry.

But if someone is not paying any taxes saying negligible income but spends > 10 lacs, IT dept will surely Q him on how he can spend so much
Or for eg:, if u say u hv negligible income in ur tax return and make FDs in Bank of > 10 lacs or invest in MFs > 10 lacs , be ready for Q on without income, how can u save so much

In fact for last year, based on this data, people hv been identified already by IT dept

Q: Where can I check my Form 26AS?

Ans:
1) Log in to ur account

incometaxindiaefiling.gov.in

2) Go to My Account -> View Form 26AS

All previous years is already be updated with this. So u can look at it for the past
For 2019-20, data is yet to be updated

Hope it helps!