CMA Final · Direct Tax Laws and International Taxation · GAAR
Meera Pvt Ltd routed a Rs 50,00,000 income through a conduit entity, an arrangement later held impermissible by the Approving Panel. The conduit paid no tax, while Meera would have paid tax at 25% if it had earned the income directly. Ignoring surcharge, cess and interest, what is the tax benefit that GAAR can neutralise?
The tax benefit is Rs 12,50,000. Had Meera earned the Rs 50,00,000 directly, it would have paid 25% tax, which is Rs 12,50,000. Since the conduit paid nothing, this entire amount is the tax avoided and can be denied under GAAR.
- ARs 12,50,000Correct
- BRs 5,00,000
- CRs 25,00,000
- DRs 37,50,000
Explanation
Tax benefit equals the tax avoided: 25% of Rs 50,00,000 = Rs 12,50,000. Check: 12,50,000 / 50,00,000 = 25%. The Rs 25,00,000 option wrongly halves the income as base, and Rs 37,50,000 is the post-tax income of 75%.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on GAAR shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More GAAR questions
- Which of the following is a consequence that may follow when GAAR is invoked against an impermissible avoidance arrangement?
- Under the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) in Indian income-tax law, which authority's approval or direction is required before the Assess…
- Which statement about the onus and the consequences once GAAR is invoked is correct?
- Which statement about the Approving Panel under GAAR is correct?
- Which of the following is a possible consequence of an arrangement being declared an impermissible avoidance arrangement under GAAR?
- GAAR is being applied to an arrangement. Which of the following statements is correct regarding the interaction of GAAR with tax treaties an…