Takeover Regulations Advisory Committee (TRAC) of SEBI was set up to improve upon the existing regulations for Takeover of listed companies. Before providing the regulation wise detailed comments, following are some of our observations on the fundamental issues:
Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee on Thursday exuded confidence that the Indian economy will post better growth than 8.75 per cent this fiscal, as projected by the economic survey.
The Government has increased the current limit of Foreign Institutional Investors (Fll) investment in Government Securities by US $ 5 billion raising the cap to US $ 10 billion and the incremental limit of US $ 5 billion be invested in securities wit
The Reserve Bank of India has, today, placed on its website “A Profile of Banks 2009-10”. The publication, “A Profile of Banks 2009-10”,the sixth volume in the series, provides a bank-wise and bank group-wise information on important performance in
The Cabinet today approved the proposal for introducing the National Identification Authority of India Bill, 2010 in Parliament. The Bill proposes to constitute a statutory authority to be called the National Identification Authority of India and lay down the powers and functions of the Authority, the framework for issuing UID numbers (aadhaar numbers), major penalties and other related matters through an Act of Parliament.
The assessee, a hotel, incurred expenditure on acquiring licenses and permissions from various government bodies. This was classified as “goodwill” in the books and depreciation was claimed on the ground that it was an “intangible asset” u/s 32(1)(ii). The AO allowed the claim. The CIT passed an order u/s 263 in which he took the view that the AO had not applied his mind to the issue and that the order was “erroneous & prejudicial to the interests of the revenue”. The CIT set aside the assessment order and directed the AO to pass a fresh order. On appeal by the assessee, HELD allowing the appeal: (i) The CIT had not recorded any finding to show how the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Merely because the AO had not examined whether the approvals / registrations etc. amounted to intangible assets and had not applied his mind to the examination and verification of the allowability of depreciation on intangible assets did not mean that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. It was not the case of the CIT that depreciation was not allowable on such items ofintangible assets; (ii) An authority exercising revisional power cannot direct the lower authority to complete the assessment in particular manner. UOI vs. Tata Engineering AIR 1998 SC 287 followed; (iii) On merits, approvals/registrations etc amount to “intangible assets” and entitled to depreciation u/s 32(1) (ii).
Today, in the present scenario also, the poor exporter is still facing enormous difficulty in getting refund orders as stated in the lines above. There is no radical change has taken place even after the change of total scheme by the Government. The refund claims are the Right of the exporters but the department is rejecting these claims on various grounds which are of trivial importance.
