Gupta Mathur & Associates

Gupta Mathur & Associates chartered accountants

28/11/2016

FOREIGN TAX CREDIT RULES NOTIFIED: CLARITY FOR INDIAN TAXPAYERS GOING GLOBAL
Huge relief to taxpayers in terms of providing for procedural mechanisms to effectuate foreign tax credit as envisaged under the Income Tax Act and Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements.
Rules remove anomalies that existed in the draft form especially in terms of clarity of timing mismatches across jurisdictions, foreign exchange fluctuation, disputed foreign income and ease in documentation requirements.
Several longstanding pain points not addressed such as the issue of claiming underlying tax credit for dividend distribution tax and tax sparing.
BACKGROUND

Recently, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (“CBDT”) has released a Notification1 dated June 27th 2016 which amend the Income tax Rules 1962 to provide for a separate segment on Foreign Tax Credit Rules, 2016 (“Rules”). The Rules provide clarity on the mechanism of obtaining foreign tax credit in India, of foreign taxes paid. The intended beneficiaries of the Rules are Indian residents that earn foreign sourced income.

A draft version of the Rules2 (“Draft Rules”) was released for comments from stakeholders earlier this year on April 18th 2016, and these rules have now been notified in final form. The Rules are based on the recommendation of the Tax Administrative Reforms Commission (“TARC”) headed by Dr. Parthasarthy Shome. The TARC Report, discussed from an administrative perspective, the issues faced by resident taxpayers in availing foreign tax credit, and recommended a course of action to ease this process.

The ability for a resident to obtain foreign tax credit has been provided under s. 91 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961 (“ITA”), which is in the nature of unilateral relief3 where a tax treaty is not in place, or typically Article 23 of the relevant tax treaty, if applicable. The need for obtaining a tax credit arises where there is an unintended double taxation due to principles of residence based and source based taxation in different jurisdictions.

ANALYSIS

The Rules aim to provide a computation mechanism, operational clarity and procedural requirements associated with availing foreign tax credit in India.

Eligibility: The newly introduced Rule 128 provides that a resident taxpayer can claim a credit for foreign taxes paid in (a) a treaty jurisdiction i.e. a country/ specified territory with which India has a double taxation avoidance agreement or an exchange of information agreement, and (b) in any other country where income tax includes excess profits tax or business profits tax charged by the central or local authority in that country.

To claim a credit, two requirements envisaged are (i) the foreign tax must have been paid, and (ii) credit may be claimed for the year in which the corresponding income is offered to tax in India

Timing mismatch: The Rules also attempt to address timing mismatch issues which arise due to the difference in the tax year systems between the source country and resident country (India) – for eg. In the US, taxes could be paid on a calendar year basis (Jan- Dec), as opposed to India where taxes are paid on a financial year basis (Apr – March). In such cases, the Rules provide that where income is taxable across two years, credit shall be proportionately distributed across those years based on when income is offered to tax in India.

While this had earlier not been addressed in the Draft Rules, which only provided for credit being obtained in the year in which the income corresponding to such tax was offered, for the amount of foreign tax paid without accounting for possible timing mismatch, the CBDT seems to have taken into account the recommendations of TARC, and suggestions by the stakeholders to address such timing differences.

Taxes covered: The Rules also specify that the credit shall be available against the amount of income tax, surcharge and cess payable under the Act but not against interest, fee or penalty in respect of the tax payable. This is in line with judicial precedents in the context of tax treaties, which have held tax relief to be available in respect of surcharge and education cess, in addition to regular income taxes on the basis that these taxes are “substantially similar” to income taxes.4 This reduces the ambiguity amongst taxpayers on the eligible taxes, and should reduce long drawn litigation on this subject.

Disputed tax: The Rules provide that no credit shall be available for any amount of foreign tax which is disputed in any manner by the taxpayer. Therefore, a tax credit is not applicable in a situation where foreign tax was paid by the taxpayer on demand during scrutiny by the foreign tax authorities, but such taxes have been disputed by the taxpayer, under appeal proceedings.

The Draft Rules had not taken into account cases where dispute has been settled, but this clarity has been brought in the final Rules. In this regard, the Rules further provide that if (i) a dispute is finally settled and (ii) the taxpayer furnishes evidence of settlement of dispute along with (iii) an evidence that the tax liability has been discharged and (iv) an undertaking that no refund in respect of such amount has been claimed within six months from the end of the month in which the dispute is finally settled, credit of such disputed tax shall be allowed.

Depending on the tax administrative efficiency of the concerned foreign jurisdiction, it may take several years for the final dispute to be resolved. This time gap may lead to an undesirable situation where taxes have been doubly paid in India and a foreign jurisdiction for a long duration for a transaction which was, in the first place not taxable.

Computation: The Rules provide that the tax credit shall be the aggregate of amounts of credit computed separately for each source of income, arising from a particular country/ territory.

Further, credit in India shall be available to an amount which is the lower of the taxes paid in India or foreign taxes paid. The Rules also provide clarity on foreign exchange fluctuation. They state that the credit shall be based on conversion rate (telegraphic transfer buying rate) on the last day of the month immediately preceding the month in which taxes were paid. This should help in reducing any incremental costs due to foreign exchange fluctuation, if there is a significant gap between payment of foreign taxes and obtaining credit in India.

Certain jurisdictions such as Singapore follow a credit pooling system where tax credits are not divided into various heads. This mechanism enables businesses to effectively utilize tax credits and avoid double taxation due to characterization issues. However, the Indian system seems to follow the more traditional form of credit – segregated on the basis of income sources.5

Credit for MAT: The Rules also provide that foreign tax credit may also be available for Indian taxes paid, which are in the nature of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT). That said, the Rules are unclear on how the computation mechanism would work in such a case, as there may be a mismatch in the source of income tax - between MAT and taxes paid in the foreign country. Clarity that foreign tax credit in case MAT is applicable, shall be available for foreign corporate taxes paid would be useful.

The Rules further provide that if foreign tax credit is availed of in respect of MAT, the taxpayer shall not be entitled to set off MAT against corporate taxes paid in future – a credit mechanism which has been provided under the MAT related provisions. A limitation has also been provided that if the foreign tax credit available is higher than the MAT credit, the lower amount shall be considered.

Documentation: Foreign tax credit shall be allowed on the taxpayer furnishing a statement of income offered for tax for the previous year in the foreign jurisdiction, and of foreign taxes deducted or paid in the foreign jurisdiction in a prescribed form (Form No. 67).

Proof of payment of taxes: The Rules further provide that the statement should specify the nature of income and the amount of tax deducted or paid by the taxpayer, as provided by (a) the tax authority of the country outside India, or (b) from the person responsible for deduction of such tax, or (c) signed by the assesse, if accompanied by an acknowledgment of the payment of such tax in the form of bank counter foil, challan or a receipt of online payment as proof depending on mode of payment, or proof of deduction if tax has been deducted.

This flexibility afforded in the Final Rules, is a departure from the Draft Rules, which provided only for validation from the foreign tax authorities – a longwinded unworkable process.

Timeline: The above requirements should be furnished on or before the due date for filing of income-tax returns.

Carry backward of losses: Lastly, the Rules specify that Form No. 67 shall also be furnished in a case where the carry backward of loss of the current year results in refund of foreign tax for which credit has been claimed in any previous year or years.

CONCLUSION

The Rules come a welcome relief to global Indian businesses earning significant income abroad. While the ITA as well as double taxation treaties provided for a credit from a substantive law perspective, practically it was a difficult and cumbersome process in the absence of well laid out procedural rules. The CBDT has been cognizant of these difficulties, and in line with the recommendation of the TARC (which was constituted to simplify tax administration), aimed to provide procedural simplicity for availing foreign tax credit through a comprehensive set of rules.

Importantly, the Rules have removed anomalies that existed in the draft form, by taking into account representations made by stakeholders, and interested parties. Welcome changes include – clarity on timing mismatches across jurisdictions, foreign exchange fluctuation, disputed foreign income and ease in documentation requirements.

That said, there are several longstanding pain points that still need to be addressed in the foreign tax credit sphere – such as ability to claim underlying tax credit for dividend distribution taxes, buyback taxes and tax sparing which are unique to the Indian tax system.

10/05/2016

File correct details in TDS return in respect of Form 15G/ 15H

Sometimes it has been observed that Flag “B” is not being raised for 15G/ H Forms in quarterly TDS Statements filed.
The prevalent practice is to raise the flag only in the TDS Statements filed in the last quarter of the Financial Year, however, such transactions must be reported within the relevant quarter.

The obligation to report each transaction in the relevant quarter, where tax has not been deducted on the basis of 15G/ H Forms, falls on the deductor and non-compliance amounts to incorrect verification of completeness of TDS statement.

Form 15G/H and its relevance:

Under section 197A of the Income Tax Act 1961, Form 15G/ H is a self-declaration, which is provided by a person resident in India (not being a Company or Firm) to their deductor that the tax on his estimated total income of the previous year, in which such income is to be included in computing his total income, will be NIL. The Declaration in writing should be collected by the deductor in Duplicate.

The Declaration can be made in the following Forms:

a. Form 15H – For Senior Citizens

b. Form 15G – For other than Senior Citizens

Such declaration under section 197A can be made only for tax deductions under section 192, 193, 194, 194A, 194C, 194D, 194G, 194H, 194I, 194J, 194K, 194LA and 195.

How to show Forms 15G/ H details in TDS statements:

If the deductee provides Forms 15G or 15H to their deductor, then deductor is not liable to deduct tax at the time of payment/ credits and needs to raise Flag “B” .

The person responsible for paying any income of the nature shall deliver or cause to be delivered to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner, a copy of the declaration, on or before the seventh day of the month next following the month in which the declaration is furnished to him.

Consequences, if deductor does not raise Flag “B”:

If the deductor does not raise Flag “B” in case of non-deduction, the rate of tax as per the relevant section under the Act will become applicable and a Short Deduction default will be raised.

10/05/2016

(BFW) India, Mauritius Sign Pact Related to Double Taxation Avoidance

By Pradeep Kurup
(Bloomberg) -- Countries sign protocol for amendment of convention for avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion: India Finance Ministry tweets.

* Protcol gives India taxation rights on capital gains arising from alienation of shares acquired on or after April 1, 2017 in a company resident in India w/effect from FY18

* Protocol also gives protection to investments in shares
acquired before April 1, 2017

* For capital gains arising during transition period from
April 1, 2017 to March 31, 2019, the tax rate will be
limited to 50% of domestic tax rate of India, subject to
fulfillment of conditions in Limitation of Benefits Article

* Taxation in India at full domestic tax rate will take place from FY20 onwards

* Protocol will tackle long pending issues of treaty abuse and round tripping of funds attributed to the India-Mauritius treaty, curb revenue loss, prevent double non-taxation, streamline the flow of investment and stimulate the flow of
exchange of information between India and Mauritius

* India says pact will improve transparency in tax matters and
will help curb tax evasion and tax avoidance; existing
investments, those made before April 1, 2017 have been grand-fathered and will not be subject to capital gains taxation in India

04/05/2016

Required Article Assistant in Gupta Mathur & Associates. call 8126318440

30/07/2014

The existing Form No. 3CA, Form No. 3CB and Form No. 3CD have been substituted vide notification no. 33/2014 dated 25.07.2014 with immediate effect.
- Taxpayers and CAs are advised to await the release of the new schema and utility to submit in the newly notified aforementioned Forms.
- Taxpayers and CAs are advised that any upload using the old Forms will not be valid even for previous AYs in view of the notification of CBDT.
- CBDT has withdrawn old utility of form No. 3CD.
- CBDT is expected to release new utility soon.

18/01/2014

The due date for filing income tax return for corporate assessees and other assessees who are required to get their accounts audited under Income Tax Act 1961 or under any other law for the time being in force is 30thSeptember and for others it is 31st July every year as have been prescribed u/s 139(1).

For a layman sometimes it may create doubt if he fails to file his return of Income within due date, whether he can file his return of Income after the due date, especially when he is under no obligation to get his accounts audited under Income Tax Act or under any other law.

The answer to this question is yes. Under section 139(4) a belated return can be filed before the expiry of one year from the end of relevant assessment year or before the completion of assessment whichever is earlier.

But, where the assessee has some capital loss or loss from business or profession to be carried forward he should file his return of income within the due date as prescribed u/s 139(1). As per section 139(3), no loss shall be allowed to be carried forward under the head Business or Profession or under the head Capital Gain unless the return is filed within the due date as mentioned in section 139(1).

Where return of income is filed after the due date, interest u/s 234A will be payable. But if there is already tax has been deducted from the income of the assessee or advance tax has been paid by the assessee and there remains no tax to be paid after such T.D.S or advance tax then no interest is levied u/s 234A for filing the return after the due date.

It is to be noted that a penalty of Rs 5000 may be imposed u/s 271F if the return of income is not filed within the end of the relevant assessment year. For example, such penalty is imposable if return for asst. year 2011-12 is not filed by 31st March 2012.

It should also be noted that where a belated return is filed u/s 139(4), no revised return u/s 139(5) can be filed as it was held in Jagdish Chandra Sinha v. CIT 220 ITR 67 (SC).

Thus if your due date for filing return was 31st July and you miss to file it within due date you can still file it after the due date as stated above.

18/01/2014

If you are a salaried taxpayer claiming HRA (house rent allowance) deduction, watch out. The central government has lowered the exemption limit for reporting the rent received. Salaried taxpayers claiming HRA exemption and paying a rent of over Rs 1 lakh per year have to give landlord's PAN (permanent account number). Till now, if the total rent paid was less than Rs 15,000 a month there was no need to submit the landlord's PAN details. The new rule effectively lowers the rent limit from Rs 15,000 a month to Rs 8,333 per month for claiming HRA exemption without making any disclosures.

"Further, if annual rent paid by the employee exceeds Rs 1,00,000 per annum, it is mandatory for the employee to report PAN of the landlord to the employer," the Central Board of Direct Taxes said in its latest circular. "In case the landlord does not have a PAN, a declaration to this effect from the landlord along with the name and address of the landlord should be filed by the employee," it said.

Though incurring actual expenditure on payment of rent is a pre-requisite for claiming deduction under section 10(13A) of the I-Tax Act, it has been decided as an administrative measure that salaried employees drawing HRA up to Rs 3,000 per month will be exempted from production of rent receipt.

18/01/2014

In a recent decision, Mumbai Income Tax Tribunal has held that where a liability was outstanding on books for a disproportionately long period of time and the assessee is unable to prove the identity & genuineness of creditors, such long outstanding liability will be assessed as income under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

In the case before the Mumbai Tribunal, the assessee, engaged in the business of civil construction and labour contractor, had an amount of Rs. 86.25 lakhs shown as outstanding labour charges in his balance sheet that had remained unpaid for more than three years. The Assessing Officer (AO) held that the fact that the amount was outstanding for so many years was abnormal. As the assessee was unable to give the addresses and labour bills of the labourers, he held that the assessee had failed to prove the genuineness of the liability and that it had ceased to exist. He therefore assessed the said sum as income u/s 41(1). On appeal, the CIT(A) reversed the AO on the ground that the fact that the amount was outstanding for a long period and that the assessee was unable to furnish confirmations did not mean that there was a remission or cessation of liability during the assessment year so as to attract s. 41(1).

On appeal by the department to the Tribunal while allowing the appeal observed that it is very improbable that payments to labour can remain outstanding for more than three years. The assessee has not been able to produce the records relating to the name, addresses and bills of the labour etc to prove that the liability continues to exist. It is accordingly a case of cessation of liability. The assessee has just continued the entry of the same in his books of account without any intention to pay back the same.

The view was taken that it would be illogical to say that a debtor or an employer, holding on to unpaid dues, should be given the benefit of his showing the amount as a liability, even though he would be entitled in law to say that a claim for its recovery is time barred, and continue to enjoy the amount. It was observed that the assessee cannot be allowed to show an amount as a liability even though he has no intention to pay it back but to enjoy the same for an unlimited period without being added to his income only on the excuse that he has not written off the same in his books of accounts. However, if the facts of the case establish that the liability has been genuinely shown by the assessee and his subsequent conduct shows that he has paid back the said credits and his intention was not to enjoy the amount for unlimited period without any intention to pay back the same, then it cannot be said to be a case of cessation of liability.

On the above premise, the Tribunal opined that on facts, not only is the existence of outstanding liability of labour charges for so many years improbable in the normal course of business but the assessee has also failed to give any evidence regarding the identity & genuineness of the creditors. Accordingly it is a case of cessation of liability and s. 41(1) applies.

The above decision of the Mumbai Tribunal is contrary to the law laid down by the Mumbai High Court in J.K.Chemicals and by the Delhi High Court in Vardhaman Overseas Ltd where the law was laid down that section 41(1) does not apply if the amount of liability is not written back in the accounts.

09/01/2014

RBI allows utility bills, tax payments under inward remittance

Reserve Bank today allowed payments to utility service providers, tax payments, and EMI payments in India with a view to expand the scope of cross-border inward remittances.

Cross-border inward remittance is a Rupee Drawing Arrangement (RDA) were remittances are received in India through exchange houses situated in gulf countries, Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia (for Malaysia only under Speed Remittance Procedure).

08/01/2014

haratiya Mahila Bank (BMB), the first all-women bank, today signed an agreement with Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) for financing students pursuing chartered accountancy

Address

A39 DCF MARKET Court ROAD
Moradabad
244001

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Gupta Mathur & Associates posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Gupta Mathur & Associates:

Share