Due to paucity of accommodation in some Zones opted by the candidates in the cities of Bangalore, Chennai , Delhi, Indore and Kolkata, some of the candidates have been allotted examinations centres in other zones of the said cities where the accommo
The Help Line Desk will be functional from 18th October to 16th NOVEMBER, 2010 for 24 hours on all days (inclusive of holidays and Sundays) to attend to any query relating to the ensuing Chartered Accountant Examinations to be held from 8th to 16th N
E-Filing for AY 10-11: Quick Statistics (as on 15th October 2010) HIGHLIGHTS OF e-FILING SEASON AY 10-11 (up to 15/10/2010) (1) COMPARATIVE PROGRESS OF e-FILING OF RETURNS
The RBI permission makes Visa the only electronic card payments technology company in India to support over forty banks, including ICICI Bank, Canara Bank and HDFC Bank, to enable them to offer their cardholders the facility of receiving remittances
Net direct tax collections during the period April-September 2010 stood at Rs.1,81,758 crore, up from Rs.1,52,625 crore in the same period last fiscal, registering a growth of 19.09 percent in H-1 against the Budgeted annual growth target of 13.67 pe
In accordance with the decision taken by the Council of the Institute recently, it is brought to the notice of the student community that henceforth (i.e. from June, 2010 Examination Session onwards), Pass Certificates will be issued only to suc
The assessee let out property on a rent of Rs. 90,000 per month and also received interest-free security deposit of Rs. 8.58 crores. The property was not subject to the Rent Control Act. The assessee claimed that only the rent could be taken into account for determining the ‘annual value’ of the property and not the notional interest on the deposit. The AO determined the ‘annual value’ u/s 23(1)(a) by adding Rs. 30 lakhs of notional interest. The CIT (A) and Tribunal deleted the addition by holding that the rateable value as determined by the MCD had to be taken as the “fair rent” u/s 23(1) (a) and the notional interest could not be added either u/s 23(1)(a) or u/s 23(1)(b). On appeal by the department HELD:
M/s Frick India Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) – There was a composite agreement titled as ‘intellectual property license and non compete agreement’ vide which several valuable rights including the right to use the trademark, technical know-how including right to export to 30 countries have been granted over a long period of ten years to the assessee, which gave rise to a benefit of enduring nature. However, the AO has allowed the same as revenue expenditure without application of mind and without keeping in view the stand taken in earlier years by the AO which was also confirmed by the CIT(A) on the very same facts.
Pearey Lal Bhawan Association Vs M/S Satya Developers Pvt Ltd (Delhi High Court) – Service Tax: whether the burden of service tax, levied on the service or facility of leasing (of the suit premises) should be borne by the lessor (i.e. the service provider) or the lessee (i.e. the defendant, user). – that unless a different intention appears from the terms of the contract, in case of the imposition or increase in the tax after the making of a contract, the party shall be entitled to be paid such tax or such increase. Although there is no explicit provision to that effect, enabling lessors such as the plaintiff, to the service tax component, this Court is of the view that there is sufficient internal indication in the Act, through Section 83 read with Section 12-A and Section 12-B suggesting that the levy is an indirect tax, which can be collected from the user (in this case, the lessee). This issue, is therefore, answered in the plaintiff’s favour, and against the defendant.
