The Narendra Modi government has taken yet another bold move post demonetisation to tighten the noose on tax evaders. This time the government has banned cash transactions over and above Rs 2,00,000. Henceforth, any person receiving cash of more than Rs 1,99,999 will have to pay 100% penalty of cash received i.e. if the amount received exceeds Rs 1,99,999, a recipient will have to pay the entire amount received as penalty under section 271DA of the Income Tax Act.
Now any person (Individual, firm, company, etc) cannot accept cash of more than Rs 1,99,999 from a single person in a day.
Acceptance of such cash will attract 100% penalty.
A person receiving cash will be liable to pay the penalty.
? Cash gifts aggregating to 2,00,000 or more than that will attract 100% penalty. This includes cash gifts from relatives as well as cash gifts on events or occasions like marriages, child birth, etc.
? There is no bar on cash deposits in banks, co-operative banks and post office saving accounts.
? Withdrawal of cash from banks is allowed without any limits.
To give you more clarity on the subject, here are some frequently asked questions and their respective answers:
Question 1: From which date these restrictions are applicable?
? Cash restrictions are applicable from financial year 2017-18, i.e., for all cash transactions after 01/04/2017.
Question 2: Whether threshold limit includes Rs 2,00,000 or not ?
? Recipient can receive an amount upto Rs 1,99,999 in a cash in a single day.
Question 3: Whether these restrictions are applicable to even those who don’t have Income Tax PAN number?
? Yes, these restrictions are applicable to all. Contravention, if any found in future by Income Tax department, a recipient will have to pay penalty @ 100%, even if the person doesn’t have a PAN number.
Question 4: Whether a person can receive an amount aggregating more than Rs 2,00,000 from different payers in a single day ?
? The above provision does not bar a person from receiving an aggregate amount of Rs 2,00,000 or more from different persons, provided single person should not pay more than Rs 1,99,999 in cash.
Mr X has received a total amount of Rs 9,00,000 on a single day from five different persons, wherein each person has contributed/paid an amount of Rs 1,50,000. In such situation Mr X won’t be hit by the provisions of 269ST.
Question 5: Whether a threshold limit of Rs 2,00,000 is transaction specific or day specific?
? Threshold limit of Rs 2,00,000 is both transaction specific as well as day specific. In both cases, section 269ST will be attracted. A person cannot receive from any other person more than Rs 1,99,999 in a single day in respect of one or more transactions. As far as specific transaction is concerned a person cannot receive cumulative amount of more than Rs 1,99,999 in cash in respect of a specific transaction.
If Mr X receives a sum of Rs 4.5 lakhs in respect of a single transaction (e.g Sale of goods in cash in a single bill), in three installments of Rs 1.5 lakhs each, on different dates, then such receipts would fall under this category of prohibited transactions even though none of these receipts were of Rs 2 lakhs or more. This is a very important condition which prohibits the splitting of payments over several days.
Question 6: What are the modes of payments prescribed by the law?
(a) an account payee bank cheque or
(b) an account payee bank draft or
(c) use of electronic clearing system through a bank account (e.g., NEFT, RTGS, online transfer from one bank account to another etc.).
Thus the receipt of amount of Rs 2 lakhs or above through any other mode e.g., cash, bearer cheque, crossed cheque, self cheque, transfer entry or adjustment entry in books of account etc., is not allowed.
Question 7: What is quantum of penalty that will be levied in case of default?
? Newly inserted penal provision, section 271DA stipulates a penalty of 100%, i.e., a sum equal to the amount of payment received in violation of section 269ST.
If a person receives an amount of Rs 2,50,000 from a single person on a same day, penalty will be levied @ Rs 2,50,000 and not on Rs 50,000.
Question 8: Who will be liable to pay penalty payer or receiver ?
? Receiver will be liable to pay penalty in case of default.
Question 9: Whether a farmer can receive an amount of Rs 2,00,00 or more in cash?
? The character of receipt is irrelevant, i.e., exempt income/taxable income etc. There is no exemption even for sale of agricultural produce. Thus even if farmer sells produce for Rs 2,00,00 or above, he cannot receive money in cash.
Question 10: Whether a person can receive cash gift exceeding Rs 1,99,999 from his close relatives in cash?
? Gift in cash from relative is exempted from income tax but if the amount of gift received is Rs 2,00,000 or more from relative in cash w.e.f 01.04.2017, the assessee will have to shell out 100% penalty. Even if the cash gift received from different persons in marriage or any similar occasion exceeds Rs 1,99,999, it will attract 269ST and accordingly receiver will be liable to pay the entire amount received as penalty.
Rushikesh Lohit reigns as numero uno in Rapid Championship; Shaunak Badole tops Nagpur Blitz Championship
Rushikesh Lohit won the Nagpur District Rapid Championship while Shaunak Badole won the Nagpur District Blitz Chess Championship held at Vivekanand Hall, Shraddha House, Kingsway, Near Kasturchand Park in Nagpur.
The championship was organised by Chess Association Nagpur in association with Kalpana Prakash Welfare Foundation and G.H.Raisoni Sports and Cultural Foundation. Muktanand Pendsey finished second in the both Rapid and Blitz Championship. Rushikesh Lohit and Muktanand Pendsey will represent Nagpur in the Rapid Championship and Shaunak and Muktanand will represent Nagpur District in the Maharashtra State Blitz Championship.
Mangesh Kashikar, Secretary, Nagpur District Badminton Association and Vice President of Maharashtra Badminton Association was the Chief Guest who distributed the prizes. Bhushan Shriwas, Secretary, CAN and Kalpana Prakash Welfare Foundation, SS.Soman, Working President, CAN and Amrish Joshi, Chief Arbiter were present on the occasion.
The Top two finishers of Rapid and Blitz Championship were awarded Trophies whereas the players finishing from 3rd to 10th place were awarded Medals in both the championship. In addition to the main prizes, age group prizes were also distributed to top two finishers in each group.
The championship was conducted by Chief Arbiter Amrish Joshi assisted by SNA Swati Kumbhalkar, SNA Amit Tembhurne, Shyam Agrawal, Prayas Amabde and Prathamesh Machave.
Wine connoisseurs come together at Wine and Food Festival 2022 in Nagpur
Wine connoisseurs came together at Wine and Food Festival 2022 in Nagpur, which took place on December 3 and 4. This was the ninth edition. It was hosted by Nagpur Wine Club, and was held at Bhagwati Lawn. The festival was open to all, where people enjoyed wine tasting and lip-smacking food by The Breakfast Story, Nagpur. Nation Next brings you some exclusive photos from the event.
‘Maharashtra government responsive towards issues of traders,’ assures Eknath Shinde
At the outset Dr Dipen Agrawal, President of Chamber of Associations of Maharashtra Industry and Trade (CAMIT) welcomed Chief Minister, Eknath Shinde with a floral bouquet in prominent presence of Krupal Tumane MP, Ramtek and submitted memorandums highlighting harassment of traders by Local Body Tax department across the state under the garb of LBT Assessment. He also appraised about the issue of Nagpur Metropolitan Region Development Authority (NMRDA) and he further brought to the notice of CM about the exorbitant hike in rent by Corporations & their coercive action on traders.
Dr Agrawal on behalf of traders of Maharashtra expressed his gratitude towards Eknath Shinde about Local Body Tax being abolished (LBT with effect from August 2015. Though LBT was abolished in 2015 but the ghost of LBT is haunting traders now and then, department in routine are passing ex-party (best judgement) orders raising inflated and fictitious tax demands and using them to justify continuance of LBT Department. Records from LBT Appellate Authority will evidence the correctness of this statement. He also informed that LBT Department in various Corporation indulged in issuing back dated assessment orders for previous financial years. He appealed to CM that the issue requires his urgent attention, intervention and directions for closure of LBT Department in all Municipal Corporations with immediate effect to ensure ease of doing business in the state and save traders from unnecessary harassment.
Eknath Shinde acknowledged that he is aware of the issue. He assured to discuss the issue in cabinet and ensure that the issue is addressed on priority basis.
Dr Dipen Agrawal informed CM, that since last few years Municipal Corporations across the state stopped renewing lease/license of property leased/licensed by them. In 2019 the state government came up with Maharashtra Municipal Corporations (Renewal of Lease or Transfer of Immovable Property) Rules, 2019. These Rules were strongly opposed by trade associations. However, after its implementation the litigation between the lessee/tenants and Corporations went to court added Dr Agrawal.
After great persuasion by the then LOP, you as minister for UDD agreed to the demand to put the notification dated 13/09/2019 in abeyance and review the exorbitant annual rent at 8% property value and fix the annual rent acceptable to all stakeholders.
After the issue was raised on the floor of the house, the State government stayed the operation of notification dated 13/09/2019 and constituted a committee of government officers to review and fix fresh rent. When we approached few members of the committee to submit our suggestions’ we learnt that the committee is of opinion that the notification in question does not apply to the Licensee holder.
Hence, in the background of above facts and circumstances Agrawal requested CM, to intervene and have the pending notification issued and fix the rent at 0.5% of Ready Reckoner value for residential & 1% for commercial lease holder Galedharaks . He further requested to notify similar rules and frame a single policy for the Licensee Galedharaks across the state and in cases where shop/otta is licensed by Corporation the annual rent be fixed at the rate of 2% of value as per ready reckoner and as the lease/license fee will be calculated on ready reckoner the clause of periodic increase dose not survive also the lease / license should be transferable and transfer fee to be charged equal to one month rent/fee for transfer within blood relation and equal to three months’ rent/fee for transfer outside blood relation and the agreed new lease rent/license fee to be made applicable prospectively and not retrospectively.
Eknath Shinde said that the issue is under active consideration and assured to look into the matter and discuss with Chief Minister, Eknath Shinde to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of all stakeholders.
Dr. Dipen Agrawal further informed Eknath Shinde that the first notification declared 5 Km area touching outer limits of Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) as Nagpur Metro Region issued in 1995 which was thereafter increased time to time to present limit of 25 Km from boundary of NMC. In 2010 Nagpur Improvement Trust (NIT) was entrusted with responsibility of Special Planning Authority for Nagpur Metro Region the limits. In 2012 NIT passed resolution for preparing development plan for Metro Region and published Draft Development Plan (2012-2032) calling objection and suggestions, in the year 2015. In 2017 Nagpur Metropolitan Region Development Authority (NMRDA) was established. In 2018 Final Development Plan (2012-2032) for Nagpur Metro Region was sanctioned and notified. NMRDA action is based on following three main reasons:-
1) Side margins are not as per 2012-2032 DCR; Dr. Agrawal highlighted that majority of units i.e., 59% were established before the 2012-NIT resolution and 85% were established before the first publication of 2015-Draft Development Plan (2012-2032), and pointed out that it is unjust on part of NMRDA to expect these units to maintain the margins prescribed in DCR (2012-32).
2) Building plan/ Non-agriculture use is not sanctioned by competent authority; Dr. Agrawal pointed out that under MRTP Act the power to change use of land is can be delegated to Thasildar and powers to authorise development to Gram Panchayat concerned. Invoking these powers Thasildar was approving and sanctioning NA Permissions and Gram Panchayat was sanctioning Building Plans. The units in good faith have taken these permissions from them and further submitted to other Government agencies.
3) Land earmarked for purpose other than industrial/commercial; MRTP Act provides for survey and preparing ‘existing-land-use’ map by Planning Authority after its declaration of intention of preparing a Development Plan. It is surprising to note that the area of many units established prior to declaration of intention of preparing Development Plan is not classified under industrial/commercial zone.
Dr. Dipen Agrawal humbly requested CM to grant an Amnesty Scheme for regularization wherein interest & penalty would be waived and also direct the authorities to notify that the MSME units established prior to 06/01/2018 (the date on which the DCR 2012-2032 for Nagpur Metropolitan Region was notified) should be saved from the provisions of the said DCR.
Eknath Shinde said that the government is sized with issue and assured to resolve the matter in the best interest of all stakeholders.
Dr. Dipen Agrawal, President-CAMIT on behalf of business community of the state expressed his gratitude towards Eknath Shinde, Chief Minister, Krupal Tumane, Member of Parliament, Ramtek for being sensitive towards the issues of trade & industry of the state.