We have heard learned counsel for the appellant-revenue. As far as the addition of Rs. 3,30,000 is concerned, it has been held that during the proceedings under section 143(3) read with section 250 of the Act, the assessee furnished a confirmation certificate from M/s Axis Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Faridabad along with PAN number. On asking of the Assessing Officer, the assessee has confirmed that the said liability is still outstanding. In spite of that material, the Assessing Officer made the addition of the amount on the basis that this liability has ceased to exist and the same is not payable by the assessee, and treated the said liability as income by invoking provision of Section 41(1) of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals), whil
Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has issued a Statement on October 16, 2009 on risks arising from the deficiencies in AML/CFT regime of Uzbekistan, Iran, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Sao Tome and Principe on the subject (copy enclosed). All NBFCs and RNBCs are accordingly advised to take into account risks arising from the deficiencies in AML/CFT regime of Iran, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Turkmenistan and Sao Tome and Principe.
It is well established position that Articles of a Company are constituent document and are binding on the Company and its Directors. As aforesaid, the intention of Article 57 is that the share capital of the Company remains within the close knit group and nothing more. On the plain language of the said provision and the intent behind it, the regime of Article 57 has no application to transfer of shares between member to member of the Company interest. There is force in the argument of the Respondents that from the contemporaneous situation, it would appear that all cap
In the case of Mayawati v. CIT [2009] 222 CTR 117 (Delhi), it is nowhere mentioned that for drawing the presumption u/s 27 of the General Clauses Act, there is necessity of acknowledgment due.
Due to recent ruling of Karnataka High Court order, all overseas payments will now be subject to withholding tax, whether or not the income is taxable. Not only is this in dramatic contrast to previous High Court decisions, it’s also a judgment that will lead to higher cost of business, increased uncertainty and maybe even more litigation—at least for a while.
You are aware that the provisions of section 29(8) and section 85 of MVAT Act, 2002 related to levy of penalty for non filing of returns within prescribed time limit were amended with effect from 1st July 2009. The amended provision provides for imposition of mandatory penalty to the defaulting dealer. The provision of section 29(8) attracts if the dealer fails to file the return as per the periodicity prescribed in the rule 17(4) of the MVAT rules. The penalty shall be levied immediately if dealer fails to file return within the time prescribed under rule 17(4).
Industry body Assocham today asked the government to raise the tax exemption limit on personal income from Rs 1.6 lakh per annum to Rs 4 lakh per annum and for senior citizens up to Rs 5 lakh per annum. The industry body was giving its proposals on the draft direct taxes code which has been put in public domain by the government for comments.
The Corporate Affairs Ministry is expected to bring out the code on corporate governance in a year’s time. Mr Salman Khursheed, Minister of State for Corporate Affairs, said on Monday that the final code would be based on the draft common minimum code, which would be out for public review by the third week of December.
The following officers are nominated as Members of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) based on the recommendations of the DGIT (International Taxation), New Delhi:
The Government has granted sanction to State Bank of India (SBI), under Section 35(1) of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, vide Department of Financial Services’ letter dated 08.10.2009 for proceeding with the negotiation with State Bank of Indore for acquiring its business. Consequently, the scheme of acquisition of State Bank of Indore by the Stat Bank of India have been approved by Board of both the Banks. The Government keeps in view the interest of all the stakeholders including employees of the merging banks.
