I am very happy to know the news that the Bar Council of India has already taken a decision to conduct an All India Qualifying Examination for law graduates for entering into profession. I don’t think that there will be an illogical uproar in legal circles in India on the proposed Examination to be conducted by the Bar Council of India. Even if there is an illogical uproar, it is the time to forcibly implement the reforms at any cost as otherwise, the damage to the legal profession; legal system and the society will be irreparable.
The Reserve Bank of India today posted on its website the draft guidelines on minimum holding period and minimum retention requirement for securitisation transactions undertaken by NBFCs. The draft guidelines contain modification of the extant guidelines issued on February 01, 2006 and also introduce two new aspects, namely, defining a minimum holding period before selling an asset to an Special Purpose Vehicle and retention of a minimum portion of the loan prior to securitisation.
In exercise of powers conferred under paragraph 2.4 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014, the Director General of Foreign Trade hereby makes the following amendment at column 3 of S. No. 22 in the List of Export Promotion Councils/ Commodity Boards/ Export Development Authorities given under Appenidx-2 of Handbook of Procedures( Vol.1 ) 2009-2014
The prevalence of divergent practices in field formations with respect to the determination of assessable value of imported goods that are warehoused under Section 58/59 of the Customs Act, 1962 and sold before being cleared for home consumption has been brought to the notice of the Board.
Download the Circular No. 5/2010 issued by CBDT dated 03rd June 2010 having 63 Pages which explains the provisions of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009. The file is in PDF format and explains all the provision in simple and understandable language.
In exercise of powers conferred under paragraph 2.4 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-2014, the Director General of Foreign Trade hereby makes the following amendment/ addition in the List of Regional Authorities given under Appendix 1 of Handbook of Procedure (Vol. I) 2009-2014:
In fact, recording of reasons ensures that the authority has applied its mind to the case and the reasons that compelled the authority to take a decision in question are germane to the contents and scope of power vested in the authority. Therefore, giving of reasons by an adjudicating body goes to the very root of the process of decision-making or adjudication and therefore, it is not just a formal requirement but indicates that the adjudicatory body has applied its own mind to the merits of the case and also to avoid any doubt as to any perfunctory approach.
Question is that whether IDR is a derivative product, shares or security. Derivative means future and options. If it can be listed as future and options then IDR may be derivative product in addition to other type of asset. It is not shares as shares are not allotted by the bank to the applicants. As you say ten IDR representing one share but if shares are actually not allotted, the name of IDR holder not entered in the register of members then it cannot be said that IDR is share. Now question is that whether it is security?
The Income Tax Department has, in a 761-page order, asserted its jurisdiction to tax Vodafone Group Plc’s $11.2 billion deal with Hutchison Telecommunications International in 2007, saying the deal was designed to hoodwink tax authorities by showing it had taken place abroad.
The Income Tax Department has filed a caveat in the Bombay High Court in the Vodafone tax case. The caveat was filed to avoid ex-parte proceedings. Vodafone is likely to move the Bombay High Court next week. It is learnt that theIncome Tax Department has issued a seven-page showcause with its final order. The showcause represents new proceedings against Vodafone and relates to representative assesses.
