CBDT grants Retrospective exemption to startup companies from angel tax w.e.f. 19.02.2019 – Notification
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Revenue)
(CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES)
Notification No. 13/2019
New Delhi, the 5th March, 2019
S.O. 1131(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (ii) of the proviso to clause (viib) of sub-section (2) of section 56 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and in supersession of the notification of Government of India in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes published in the Gazettee of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, Section (3), Sub-section (ii) vide number S.O. 2088(E) dated 24th May, 2018, except as respect things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Government, hereby notifies that the provisions of clause (viib) of sub-section (2) of section 56 of the said Act shall not apply to consideration received by a company for issue of shares that exceeds the face value of such shares, if the said consideration has been received from a person, being a resident, by a company which fulfills the conditions specified in para 4 of the notification number G.S.R. 127(E), dated the 19th February, 2019 issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry in the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade and published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, section 3, Sub-Section (i) on 19th February, 2019 and files the declaration referred to in para 5 of the said notification of the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade.
2. This notification shall be deemed to have come into force retrospectively from the 19th February, 2019.
[F. No. 370142/5/2018-TPL (Pt.)]
PRAVIN RAWAL, Director (Tax Policy and Legislation)
Assessing Officer had taken a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat/text message was 25 lakh - ITAT…
Shareholders are only owners of the shares of the company therefore, income from properties earned by the company cannot be…
When approval for reassessment was granted by unauthorised authority, such jurisdictional error cannot be shielded by the law of limitation…
ITAT on presumption of bogus purchases ought to have remanded case to AO to reconsider the whole matter instead of…
Where proceedings u/s 153C are barred by limitation, AO can not reopen the case invoking section 148 and 148A of…
Corporate guarantees executed by the corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC and banks to be recognized as financial creditors…
View Comments
Good Move!!