Chennai Mar 23 PTI The Madras High Court has rejected a PIL plea challenging the amendments made in the Finance Act and LIC Act which enabled the central government to disinvest its stakes in the Life Insurance Corporation of India The first bench of Chief Justice M N Bhandari and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy was dismissing the petition from L Ponnammal a policy-holder with the insurance behemoth who contended that the subject matter would not fall within the definition of Money Bill The amendments were introduced by the Money Bill under Article 110 of the Constitution though the same did not fall within the said category she added There is no constitutional illegality in the Parliament having amended the Life Insurance Corporation LIC Act by way of a Money Bill for floating an Initial Public Offering IPO and parting with its shareholding in the corporation to raise Rs 65000 crore to Rs 70000 crore initially to the Consolidated Fund of India the bench said Rejecting the petitioners contention the bench said that a challenge to the Finance Act of 2021 through which the LIC Act was amended could not be accepted in the absence of a challenge to a certificate issued by the Lok Sabha Speaker classifying the Finance Bill 2021 as a Money Bill The Speakers decision should be treated as final as per Article 1103 of the Constitution unless a judicial review of it had been prayed for The issues related to payment or withdrawal of money either from the Consolidated Fund or Contingency Fund of India would fall under the definition of Money Bill and if any question arises as to whether a Bill was a Money Bill or not the decision of the Lok Sabha Speaker would be final as per Article 1103 of the Constitution The present case is not one where an allegation of constitutional fraud has been made Even otherwise we do not find constitutional bar or illegality in the Act of 2021 It is more so when the Parliament endowed with plenary powers had passed the Bill and the Standing Committee on budget had approved it after scrutiny and due diligence the Bench said In any case the petitioner who is a policyholder having a policy worth Rs 50000 is questioning the receipt of money approximately in the range of Rs 65000 crore to 70000 crore into the Consolidated Fund of India on account of the IPO The intrusion or inference to the implementation of a public interest policy by way of legislation should be eschewed as it directly impacts the economic growth of the country and interference therein may have far reaching consequences because the money is to be used for the development of the country the bench said and dismissed the PIL LIC had on February 13 filed the draft red herring prospectus DRHP for LIC IPO SEBI had earlier given the approval to the draft papers paving the way for the share sale The government was expecting to garner over Rs 60000 crore by selling about 316 crore or 5 per cent shares in the life insurance firm to meet the curtailed disinvestment target of Rs 78000 crore in the current fiscal PTI CORR SA SA

New Delhi [India], March 23 (ANI): Congress MP Manickam Tagore has given an adjournment notion notice in Lok Sabha on Wednesday to discuss the last date of March 31, 2022, fixed by the Centre for linking PAN with Aadhaar card.

New Delhi Jan 24 PTI Proceeds of high-premium Unit Linked Insurance Plans ULIPs has been made taxable to create a level-playing field with mutual funds official sources said on Monday The Central Board of Direct Taxes CBDT that frames policy for the income tax department had on January 18 notified the rules stating the method of calculation of capital gains with regard to ULIPs with annual premium of more than Rs 25 lakh and subsequently issued a circular the next day charting out various aspects of their taxation Income-tax department sources told PTI that the rules and guidelines were notified by the CBDT to give effect to the announcement made with regard to ULIPs in the last Union Budget These do not bring any new taxation provision but only clarify the method of calculation of capital gains when it comes to redeeming ULIPs in specified cases they said The Finance Act of 2021 carried out amendment in section 1010D of the Income-tax Act following which the sum received under ULIPs issued on or after Feb 1 2021 shall not be exempt if the annual premium payable for any year exceeds Rs 250 lakh This provision was enacted to create level playing field between mutual fund investment and ULIP investment a senior I-T department official said Clarifying the various aspects and concerns over the taxation of ULIP redemptions in certain cases the official said the move was made after it was found that ULIPs were being preferred by investors for investment purposes as compared to insurance In case of mutual funds its redemption is charged to capital gains tax However in case of ULIP the redemption was exempt even though the insurance part of the premium was very less and investment part of the premium was high the official said Another official said that this amendment in the Finance Act of 2021 ensured that both mutual fund units and ULIPs operate on the same footing However a general exemption was provided to those cases where annual premium is not more than 25 lakh in a year This 25 lakh benefit was provided for ULIPs even if it was not there for mutual fund so that premium paid for life insurance part does not get hit the official said The second official quoted above added that the Finance Act of 2021 also inserted sub-section 1B in section 45 of the Income-tax Act to make income from ULIPs taxable as capital gains just like redemption from mutual fund is taxable as capital gains The amendment in the Finance Act of 2021 also made it clear that if there is more than one policy the Rs 25 lakh premium limit for a year would be applied by aggregating the premium of such policies Hence there was a need for providing clarity by way of a circular informing the investors how taxable income is to be calculated when there is more than one ULIP the second officer quoted above said PTI NES MR MR

New Delhi Nov 22 PTI As many as 14 companies against whom retrospective tax demands were raised have approached the government to settle cases Revenue Secretary Tarun Bajaj saidThe government in August enacted a law to end all retrospective taxation imposed on indirect transfer of Indian assets The rules under the law seek to withdraw tax demands made using a 2012 retrospective legislation to tax the indirect transfer of Indian assets and also refund the amount paid in these cases without any interestTalking to PTI Bajaj said of the 17 companies against whom retrospective tax demand was raised barring three or four entities all have given an undertaking to the government to resolve the casesAll of them have approached There were 17 cases out of which 34 had no trace We had also sent the order in email we never got a response The remaining 14 baring 1 odd who still has time to file the remaining has filed Cairn Earlyguard have come for settlement he saidWith regard to Vodafone Bajaj said the UK-telecom company has time till month end to file for settlement For some the change in tax laws was made through the I-T Act for some the change was made through the Finance Act The company for whom changes were made through Finance Act has time till end of the month to file for settlement he addedOn October 1 the Finance Ministry had notified rules which prescribed that companies will have to withdraw any pending litigation or proceeding before any forum against the levy of the retrospective tax and also give an assurance that they wont pursue any further claims in the future In addition the companies and any other interested party were required to furnish an indemnity bond committing not to seek damage from the Indian government or its affiliatesLater on October 13 the Ministry notified a fresh set of rules to facilitate settlement of the retrospective tax dispute with British telecom giant Vodafone Plc The Relaxation of Validation Section 119 of the Finance Act 2012 Rules 2021 prescribed the forms and conditions for the declaration to be filed by the company for settling its case Vodafone had 45 days to approach the government for a settlementThe case pertaining to Vodafone is different as taxes were sought from the company by validating an October 2010 order of the I-T department that sought Rs 11218 crore in taxes from the British firm over its 2007 acquisition of Hutch-Essar through a deal in the Cayman IslandsThe Supreme Court had in January 2012 quashed the tax demand but the same was sought to be revalidated through Section 119 in the Finance Act 2012 A penalty of Rs 7900 crore was also sought from VodafoneAsked how soon the disputes would be resolved Bajaj said Cairn is working on it now the ball is in their court As soon as they take the cases back we will give them the cheque In those cases where there is no money to be refunded settlement there would be faster The Taxation Laws Amendment Bill 2021 enacted in August scraps the tax rule that gave the tax department power to go 50 years back and slap capital gains levies wherever ownership had changed hands overseas but business assets were in IndiaThe 2012 legislation was used to levy a cumulative of Rs 110 lakh crore of tax on 17 entities including Vodafone but substantial punitive action was taken only in the case of CairnLast week PTI had reported that Cairn Energy PLC had earlier this month given required undertakings indemnifying the Indian government against future claims as well as agreeing to drop any legal proceedings anywhere in the worldThe government has now accepted this and issued Cairn a so-called Form-II committing to refund the tax collected to enforce the retrospective tax demand two sources with direct knowledge of the development saidFollowing the issuance of Form-II Cairn will now start withdrawing all cases in international courts Once this is complete the company will be issued a Rs 7900 crore refund PTI JD ANU ANU