Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission income exempted u/s 10(46) of Income Tax Act

Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission income exempted u/s 10(46) of Income Tax Act

MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Revenue)
(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 23rd June, 2020

S.O. 2015(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (46) of section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notifies for the purposes of the said clause, ‘Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission’, Mumbai (PAN AAAGM0004R), a commission established by the State Government of Maharashtra, in respect of the following specified income arising to that Commission, namely:-

(a) Grants from Government of Maharashtra;

(b) Fees for annual licence;

(c) Interest on Fixed Deposit and Savings Account;

(d) Fees for application/petition filed;(e)Fees for Documents;

(f) Penalty for delayed payment of Annual Licence Fees;

(g) Fees for RTI;

(h) Sale of Scrap;

(i) Interest on Loans and Advances given to employees;

(j) Fees for annual performance review;

(k) Fees for determination of tariff; and

(l) Fees for initial licence.

2.This  notification  shall  be  effective  subject  to  the  conditions  that  Maharashtra  Electricity  Regulatory Commission, Mumbai,-

(a) shall not engage in any commercial activity;

(b) activities and the nature of the specified income shall remain unchanged throughout the financial years; and

(c) shall file return of income in accordance with the provision of clause (g) of sub-section (4C) of section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

(d) shall file the Audit report along with the Return, duly verified by the accountant as provided in explanation  to  section  288(2)  of  the  Income-tax  Act,  1961  along  with  a  certificate  from  the chartered accountant that the above conditions are satisfied.

3. This  notification  shall  apply  with  respect  to  the  assessment  years  2021-2022,  2022-2023,  2023-2024, 2024-2025 and 2025-2026.

[Notification.No.34/2020/F.No.300196/53/2019-ITA-I]

PRAJNA PARAMITA,Director

• CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.
• Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC
• CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price
• Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities
• No protective addition required when additions is confirmed in hands of searched person – ITAT