ARTICLE 142 of the Constitution of India DO NOT CONSTITUTE A BINDING PRECEDENT. Even therein, the scope and ambit of this Court’s jurisdiction under Article 142 vis-`-vis existence of the statue and statutory rules and the constitutional mandate contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India had not been taken into consideration.
Recently, hon’ble Supreme Court in RAJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA V. PRAKASH CHANDRA MISHRA & ORS. {(2011) 2 SCC 705; Civil Appeal No(s). 984 of 2006-Decided on 12-01-2011} has held as follows (in para 2). Rules of procedure are handmaids of justice. Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure gives inherent powers to the court to do justice. That provision has to be interpreted to mean that every procedure is permitted to the court for doing justice unless expressly prohibited, and not that every procedure is prohibited unless expressly permitted.
The aspect of whether the provision of Section 33 is directory or mandatory WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M. ANASUYA DEVI’S CASE (supra), and in fact, SECTION 33 OF THE STAMP ACT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN ADVERTED TO in the said judgment. The Supreme Court in the case of N. Bhargavan Pillai Vs. State of Kerala 2004 (13) SCC 217 has laid down that when any judgment, even of a Supreme Court, does not advert to a direct provision of law then, the JUDGMENT IS TO BE TREATED AS HAVING BEEN RENDERED PER INCURIAM.” (capitals mine)
A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 55 – It has been decided to enhance the FII investment limit in listed non-convertible debentures / bonds, with a residual maturity of five years and above, and issued by Indian companies in the infrastructure sector, where ‘infrastructure’ is defined in terms of the extant ECB guidelines, by an additional limit of USD 20 billion taking this limit from USD 5 billion to USD 25 billion (with this the total limit available to FIIs for investment in listed non convertible debentures / bonds would be USD 40 billion with a sub limit of USD 25 billion for investment in listed non-convertible debentures / bonds issued by corporates in the infrastructure sector). Further, such investment by FIIs in listed non-convertible debentures / bonds would have a minimum lock-in period of three years. However, FIIs are allowed to trade amongst themselves during the lock-in period. It has also been decided to allow SEBI registered FIIs to invest in unlisted non-convertible debentures / bonds issued by corporates in the infrastructure sector, provided that such investment is as per the aforementioned terms and conditions.
(i) It is evident that EVERY INSTRUMENT shall be chargeable with duty, which is EXECUTED in India. (ii) The terms & conditions on “Airline ticket” or “Courier consignment receipt” etc are accepted orally by the buyer, rather there is IMPLIED ACCEPTANCE.iii) Therefore, “Airline ticket” or “Courier consignment receipt” etc are not EXECUTED INSTRUMENTS by both the parties, hence not chargeable with duty.
Presently, an AD category – I bank is required to obtain unconditional, irrevocable standby Letter of Credit (LC) or guarantee from an international bank, for an advance remittance exceeding US $ 1,00,000 or its equivalent, for imports of goods into India. With effect from 29 April 2011, RBI has enhanced the aforesaid limit to US $ 2,00,000.
NOTIFICATION F. NO. LAD-NRO/GN/2011-12/05/13907, DATED 29-4-2011 These Regulations may be called the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) (Amendment) Regulations, 2011. They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
CIT vs. M/s Eli Lilly & Co. (India) P. Ltd. The Supreme Court ruled that an Indian company is responsible for withholding tax on remuneration paid to its expatriates by a foreign company outside India if the services are rendered solely in India. Section 192 has extra-territorial jurisdiction when salaries taxable u/s 9(1 )(ii) are payable outside India.
The High Court has held that the LO would be considered as a PE under the India-Korea tax treaty once the material on record establishes that it is undertaking trading activity, entering into business contracts and fixing price for sale of goods. Merely because the officials of the LO are not signing any written contract would not absolve the liability.
Notification No. 33/2011 – Customs (N. T.) , New Delhi, 29th April, 2011. S. O… (E) – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Board, being satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do, hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 36/2001-Cus (N. T.), dated, the 3rd August 2001, namely: –
