Impact of counterfeit currency on National Economy. Reserve Bank of India maintains that the volume of fake currency is negligible, at less than 0.001% (8 notes per million pieces) of the total notes in circulation and, therefore, there is no serious threat to the economy on this account.
Please refer to our circular UBD (PCB) CO.BPD. Cir. No. 15 / 14.01.062 / 2009-10 dated October 22, 2009 on the above subject. We have since received from Government of India (Ministry of External Affairs) copies of notes dated September 3, 2009; September 23, 2009 and October 22, 2009 from the Chairman of UN Security Council’s 1267 Committee regarding changes made in the Consolidated List of Individuals and entities linked to Al-Qaida and Taliban as specified below:
As per the extant instructions, provisions made for NPAs as per prudential norms are deducted from the amount of Gross NPAs to arrive at the amount of Net NPAs. In cases where banks make specific provision for NPAs in excess of what is prescribed under the prudential norms, the total specific provision may be deducted from the amount of Gross NPAs while reporting the amount of Net NPAs. The additional specific provision made by the bank will not be reckoned as Tier II capital.
It is quite common for the Revenue to treat such expenditure as capital in nature and administer depreciation allowance, only. An assessee would always put forth his argument that such replacement cost is only to maintain the existing level of efficiency of his manufacturing facility and would not result in any increase in its production capacity, thereby claiming it to be revenue in nature. In this context, it is quite pertinent to examine the current judicial thinking on this issue.
Special Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (ITA Nos.87Del//2008, 4788/Del/2007 and 233/Ahd/ 2006) holds that expenditure relating to exempt income to be disallowed even if assessee has not earned any tax-free income.
The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai in the case of Mr. Bomi S. Billimoria vs. A.C Cir 23(1), Mumbai (ITA No.2120/Mum/1998) held that in case no payment has been made for acquiring shares under Employee Stock Option Plan, the gain on sale of said shares should not be liable to capital gains tax. As the date of exercise of options and date of sale is same and further, there is no difference between the sale price and the deemed cost of acquisition, in any case, it is not short term capital gains.
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in the case of Triton Holdings Ltd. vs Dy. Director of Income Tax, Deharadun (ITA Nos. 2541 to 2559/Del/2009) held that the tax paid by employer on the behalf of employees should be considered as a non-monetary perquisite in the hands of the employees for the purpose of claiming an exemption under section 10(10CC) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).
The Delhi Bench of the Income – tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Tribunal), in the case of Vertex Customer Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. (the taxpayer) held that exclusion of provision of doubtful debts from the operating expenses being a debatable issue and considering full disclosure made by the taxpayer; the taxpayer could not be held liable for penalty.
Recently, the Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Maggronic Devices Pvt. Ltd. [2009-TIOL-568-HC-HP-IT] held that payment made by the taxpayer to a Singapore company for outright purchase of plant and product knowhow cannot be considered as ‘Royalty’ within the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, no tax was required to be deducted while making payment to the Singapore company for acquiring such know-how outside India.
Notification No. 141/2009 – Customs In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), read with rules 13, 18 and 20 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, the Central Government hereby rescinds the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 74/2009-Customs, dated the 22nd June, 2009, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R.438(E), dated the 22nd June, 2009, except as respect things done or omitted to be done before such rescission.
