The Central Board of Direct Taxes have decided to defer the implementation of Notification No.31/2009 dated 25.3.2009 amending or substituting Rules 30, 31, 31A and 31AA of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The amended / substituted Rules will now come into effect on 1st July 2009 instead of 1st April 2009.
7. Under section 12AA1(a) of the Act, the CIT is empowered to call for information to satisfy himself about the genuineness of activities of trust /institution. The Commissioner may make such enquiries as he thinks fit for the purpose. Under section 12AA1(b) of the Act, after having satisfied about the objects of Trust/institution and genuineness of its activities,
19. One of the things which is clearly discernable from the facts of this case is that so far as the year before us is concerned, which was incidentally first full year of assessee’s operations, the import content of the raw materials was as high at 98.95%. This is materially different from the import content of the raw material in the cases of the comparables selected by the revenue authorities.
5. It would be appropriate to reproduce section 36(1)(viii) of the Act as it stood in the relevant assessment years i.e. A.Y.1997-98 in the following terms: – Section 36(1)(viii) : as it stood in the statute during the A.Y.(1997-98) 36(1) – The deductions provided for in the following clauses shall be allowed in respect of the matters dealt with therein, in computing the income referred to in section 28
6. We have thoroughly gone through the averments of both the sides. To appreciate the case of the Revenue, Revenue should have brought to record that Nyco is a consulting engineering firm providing engineering service commercially having been manned by professional qualified engineers. But primary object appears to be sharing of know how to participate in a joint venture to enjoy fruit
23. After careful consideration of the above circular it is clear that the contract for the sale of goods will not be covered within the ambit of sec. 194 C. In the present case we find that the assessee placed orders with the manufacturers for manufacturing of the medicines strictly according to its specifications but the property in such goods passed to the assessee only after these were delivered to him
11. Having heard the learned counsel for the Revenue as well as the assessee we are of the view that the answers to the questions framed has to be found in favour of the assessee and against Revenue for the reasons given hereinafter. It is clear upon perusal of the facts and circumstances quoted by us hereinabove that if JISCO had to have a successful rights issue it was incumbent that it received a subscription
8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. A great deal of emphasis had been laid by he Id. DR on the fact that since the addition has been upheld by the tribunal, then the penalty should also be confirmed. In our considered opinion the mere fact of confirmation of addition cannot per se lead to the confirmation of the penalty
9. From the rival positions of both the parties as well as the provisions of section 41(1) and the legal propositions of various judicial fora, the following issues have emerged. They are: (a) the issue of limitation of period of three years; (b) the issue of discharge of onus, when the assessee has not unilaterally written them off; (c) the issue of unilateral write off for the assessments of the post amendment period i.e. 1.4.1997
THE general perception about vigilance cases among Government officials is that the launching of a vigilance case takes no time but closure becomes indefinite. Dispelling such a myth the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in its report for the month of March, has revealed that as many as 488 officers were exonerated and closure of their […]
