Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
Upon completion of additional EO of 8 times of Rs. 1.5 crore,with maintenance of average of Rs.20 Crore annually, the export obligation imposed on the second license shall stand fulfilled and “previous additional export obligation” imposed on the third licence ( after being reduced to Rs.1.5 Crore) shall be subsumed.
communicate to SEBI, the status of the implementation of the provisions of this circular in the Monthly Development Report.
In exercise of powers conferred by Section 5 of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 read with paragraph 1.3 of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), 2004-2009, as amended, the Central Government hereby makes the following amendments in FTP, 2004-2009 (Updated as on 19.4.2007).
EAGERNESS to appropriate the refund claim against pending dues was best observed in the case of Birla Copper vs. CCE, Vadodara . In that case, against an order-in-original of June 2003, the assessee had obtained an Unconditional Stay from the Tribunal in the month of August 2003. Later, in the month of June 2005, the Tribunal extended the Stay by stipulating “pending disposal of the appeal”. Incidentally, the matter came to be referred to the Third Member in view of difference in opinion.
The Japanese, with their fierce sense of commitment and loyalty to the organisation they are associated with, were ironically blasé about insider trading as typified by the general response to the law brought in 1988 in Japan to tackle the menace — what is wrong in being smart? Equally ironical is the assiduity with which insiders are pursued in the US. A journalist was hauled over the coals there for making a fast buck out of the information she garnered during the course of analysis of a company.
When agreements are entered into for purchase of property, rights are created in favour of the parties to the agreement. Failure to honour the agreement can lead to breach of contract and claims for damages or specific performance. Quite often, such breach of contract ultimately results in a compromise settlement of the dispute and monies are paid as quits. Will the receipt of such compensation for breach result in tax consequences?
THE jinxed tax that is Service Tax on GTA , is haunting the tax administration, courts and the hapless assessees for more than a decade. While the net collection from this tax would be less than peanut, the amount of litigation it has generated, must have cost the nation heavily – the Government should seriously consider doing away with this tax or maybe levying a flat 2% without credit.
ISEVA SYSTEMS PVT LTD Vs THE ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – The grounds relating to levy of interest u/s. 234B has not been considered by the ld. CIT(Appeals) . However, we are inclined to hold that levy of such interest is to be mandatorily levied in accordance with the mandatory provisions of the section, which the AO is directed to levy. The agitation with respect to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) is premature and is dismissed as rightly not considered by the ld. CIT(Appeals) as well.
TILL a few months back, it used to be a rare event in which the Delhi High Court used to impose costs on the Income Tax Department. And this is what perhaps encouraged the Revenue to keep filing appeals indiscriminately and virtually in all cases. But such a cosy run has evidently run out of luck now. So much exasperated is the High Court over the Department’s thick-skinned approach to curb frivolous appeals that it can now be seen imposing costs in most of the cases. And it happened even in this case where the issue revolves around allowance of bad debts and stock damages. While computing book profits u/s 115JA, the AO added back the provisions of doubtful debts and stock damages as he felt that such provisions cannot be categorised as ascertained liabilities in advance.
