sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
News Headlines »
 How to use your Form 16
 Which ITR form applies to you for financial year 2017-18?
 Income tax returns filing form-2 released; should you use it? Find out
  Are you planning to file ITR 1 form? here's how to do it Income Tax Return (ITR) filing
 30 LPA-Opening Financial Controller
 ITR form 2 in java release by CBDT for return filing by individuals
 How to file your income tax return using ITR Form-1 Income Tax efiling for AY 2018-19
 Income tax returns (ITR) filing: Have you received I-T dept notice? Safeguard yourself; here is how
 Delayed release of electronic ITR forms may compel CBDT to extend the filing deadline
 Trading volume linked to tax return?
 How to e-verify your income tax return? Here are five ways to do it

The cost of infraction of law
August, 26th 2006
A contract stipulating a percentage as fees is not prohibited by law The strict letter of the income-tax law can visit you with hefty compensatory interest and penalty if there is delay in compliance, non-payment of tax or failure to account for the entire income. There are cases where the interest levied has been much more than the tax demand, and there is nothing much that can be done about it. Circulars of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) seek to reduce the rigours of the law. Most writ petitions concern interest charges. The penalty for concealment is the entire tax amount. Violation of the law can mean huge costs for a company and prolonged litigation, as happened to the Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation. The HP State Forest Corporation is a government company subject to statutory audit. For the assessment year (AY) 1992-93, the company's income was computed in the first instance at Rs 1,30,00,000. It was discovered that there was concealment. The assessable income was Rs 4,88,58,590. The assessment was reopened by the Department and the liability was found to be Rs 12,93,42,479. The Corporation wanted to save penalty for concealment and engaged the services of a leading firm of chartered accountants. Fortunately for the Corporation, the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme (VDIS) was in operation at that time. The chartered accountants advised the company to take advantage of VDIS 1997 and declare the income of Rs 4,88,58,590. After deducting the tax on income admitted in the original return, the tax as per the VDIS 1997 was found to be Rs 1,25,50,510. The accountants wrote to the Corporation that by virtue of the VDIS 1997, the tax liability would come down from Rs 12,93,42,479 to Rs 1,25,50,510. The accountants stipulated professional charges at 1 per cent of the total liability. The Corporation agreed to pay the professional charges and the firm obtained the VDS certificate from the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT). The Corporation got substantial relief and avoided litigation. The firm, as per the agreement, sent a bill for Rs 12,93,425 towards professional charges. The Corporation, however, paid only Rs 2,00,000 and refused to pay the balance. Strangely, having agreed to pay fees at 1 per cent, the Corporation backtracked, complaining that charging fees on percentage basis was prohibited under the provisions of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The firm of chartered accountants filed a suit for recovery of the balance amount. The matter reached the High Court of Himachal Pradesh (2006 193 Taxation 137 HP). Going back on an agreement The court examined in detail the Chartered Accountants Act. It pointed out that Section 15 of the Act vested the function of supervision with the Council of Chartered Accountants of India. The agreement between the firm of chartered accountants and the Corporation cannot be said to be per se illegal under Section 23 of the Contract Act. The firm stipulated a fee of 1 per cent of the tax saved. The agreement did not say specifically that the fee was contingent upon the firm obtaining the Certificate of the Commissioner of Income-tax. The case was not covered by Clause 10 of the First Schedule. If the Corporation was aggrieved by the contract, it should have taken up the complaint before the Council of the CAs for appropriate proceedings, but it cannot be said that the contract stipulating a percentage as fees is prohibited by law. The Chief Justice observed: "The prohibition for charging fees on percentage basis of profits or contingent upon the result of the case will not render the instant agreement either void or illegal." The Corporation was directed to pay the fees of the CA firm as demanded. T. C. A. Ramanujam (The author is a former Chief Commissioner of Income-Tax.)
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - We Bring IT. Offshore software outsourcing company. We use Global Delivery Model (GDM) and believe in Follow The Sun principle

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions