These four appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 2004- 05 to 2007- 08 are directed against the common order of the CIT (A). Since an identical issue is involved in all these appeals preferred by the assessee, these are being disposed off with this consolidated order.
This is in continuation of circulars (a) No. SMD/SED/CIR/93/23321 dated November 18, 1993 specifying the norms for regulation of transactions between clients and brokers, (b) No. SEBI/MIRSD/DPS-1/Cir-31/2004 dated August 26, 2004 specifying the model format for the Member Clients Agreements, and (c) No. MRD/DoP/SE/Cir-20/2005 dated September 8, 2005 specifying the conditions for issuing electronic contract notes.
Notification No. 130/2009-Customs Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 20/2006-Customs, dated the 1st March, 2006 which was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide number G.S.R. 92(E), dated the 1st March, 2006, namely:- In the said notification, in the Table, against S. No. 4, for the entry in column (3), the entry, Fertilizers and all inputs/ raw materials for use in the manufacture of fertilizers shall be substituted;
Attention is invited to Board’s Circular No. 824 /1 /2006-CX dated 16 th January, 2006 on the aforesaid subject. It has been reported that some of the Commissionerates have taken a view that once an order has been passed on issues like classification/valuation etc., in that case, all subsequent removals must follow the said order even though appeal of the assessee against the said order is pending. It has further been reported that in case of removal without conforming to the said order, the goods have been seized on the ground that these have been cleared in violation of the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority.
UBD.BPD (PCB).Cir No.25/09.11.200/2009-10 Dated – December 3, 2009 The Government had in exercise of powers conferred by Section 35 of the Act issued (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2008 dated January 24, 2008 extending the last date for taking membership of at least one credit information company by credit institutions to December 31, 2008. A copy of captioned Notification dated January 24, 2008 is enclosed for information and necessary action. Further extension of time is under consideration.
Please refer to our circulars UBD.No.BPD.PCB.Cir9/09.11.200/2003-04 dated August 18, 2003 and UBD.PCB. Cir.No.42/09.11.200/2006-07 dated May 7, 2007 permitting Urban Cooperative Banks (UCBs) to undertake insurance business as corporate agent and/or on referral basis without risk participation subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. UCBs have been advised to sell insurance products to the bank’s customers with adequate disclosure and transparency and they should not adopt any restrictive practice of forcing its customers to go in only for a particular insurance company in respect of products marketed by the bank. The customers should be allowed to exercise their own choice.
In the case of supply of manpower individuals are contractually employed by the manpower recruitment or supply agency. The agency agrees for use for the services of an individual, employed by him to another person for a consideration.
According to Express India the Bombay High Court has dismissed a case which was filed by the Income Tax Department against the actor.The case accused Khan of declaring his income for the year 1999-2000 as Rs 2,95,09,771 when he had actually earned Rs 4,63,64,106. Investigators charged the actor in 2006 after re-assessing his accounts.
We have considered the rival submissions carefully in the light of the relevant material on record as well as the decision cited by the parties. After careful perusal of various authorities relied on either side would show that they are quite distinguishable because none of the case law deals with the training expenses. In these cases some principles have been laid down. We further find that the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the assessee in the case of Ishikawajima- Harima Heavy industries Ltd. v. Director of Income-tax (supra) is not applicable because that decision
During the last one week’s investigation into the bribery case against Company Law Board (CLB) member R Vasudevan, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has purportedly found that Vasudevan had made enough ill-gotten money. In fresh raids, the agency has recovered cash, FDRs and jewellery worth nearly Rs 1 crore from his residence.
