The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) said on Thursday that all deposit taking non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) should maintain a minimum capital ratio consisting of Tier-I and Tier-II capital of 15% from March 31, 2012. Earlier such NBFCs had to maintain a minimum capital ratio of 12% of the aggregate risk weighted assets on the balance sheet and of risk adjusted value off-balance sheet items.
The Empowered Committee of State Finance Ministers (EC) met on 11 February 2011 to discuss the third draft of the Constitutional Amendments required for introduction of GST (the Third Draft) and the compensation plan for loss of revenue on account of
Description- Goods manufactured at the site of construction for use in construction work at such site
Earlier, it was informed to the Hon’bel High Court was informed that the SLP filed in the earlier writ petition of Home Solution as well as the subsequent one was admitted and the Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted stay against the order passed
CIRCULAR NO. DNBS.PD/CC.NO.211/03.02.002/2010-11 In terms of paragraph 16 of Non-Banking Financial (Deposit Accepting or Holding) Companies Prudential Norms (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2007, every deposit taking NBFC shall maintain a minimum capital ratio consisting of Tier I and Tier II capital, which shall not be less than 12% of its aggregate risk weighted assets on balance sheet and of risk adjusted value of off-balance sheet items.
The Reserve Bank of India, having considered it necessary in public interest and being satisfied that, for the purpose of enabling the Bank to regulate the credit system to the advantage of the country, it is necessary to amend the Non-Banking Financial (Deposit Accepting or Holding) Companies Prudential Norms (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2007, contained in Notification No. DNBS. 192/DG(VL)-2007, dated February 22, 2007, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 45JA of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934)
Ravaged by many scandals and widely criticised the Prime Minister (PM) Manmohan Singh (MMS) eventually decided to break silence to reveal all. He has taken a heavy beating on his image as being the founders of India’s economic boom to someone who did
Tribunal has exercised the powers under Section 80 of the Act and therefore setting aside the penalty under Section 76 by the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be held to be unreasonable. Further, the respondent has admittedly paid 25% of the penalty within one month from the date of the order of the original authority. Therefore, the waiver of penalty in excess of 25% of the Service Tax evaded under Section 78 is also justified and, therefore, order of the Commissioner (Appeals) calls for no interference.
. The respondent functions as loan processor between ICICI bank, Home Finance Co. Ltd. and the borrowers. The bank collects processing fee from the borrowers. Out of the amount so collected as processing fee, some portion is paid to the respondent as commission for their services. The department was of the view that the respondents rendered “Business Auxiliary Services” to the bank and, therefore, service tax was payable on the commission fee received by them from the bank. On being pointed out by the department, th
Whereas the designated authority in its preliminary findings vide notification number 14/25/2008-DGAD, dated the 16th February, 2010, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I, Section 1, dated the 16th February, 2010, had come to the conclusion that various parameters relating to domestic industry collectively and cumulatively established that the domestic industry had suffered material injury
