Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
ORDER NO. 78 OF 2011 -The following officer who have come back from deputation and awaiting posting are hereby posted as OSD in the CCIT(CCA) Region as against their names with effect from the date of their reporting back to the Board and until further orders
The Income Tax department has found instances of alleged tax evasion and multiple routing of undeclared wealth in the 2G spectrum allocation scam and will file its first status report on the probe in the case in the Supreme Court tomorrow. The department, according to officials, has reportedly traced instances of tax evasion by various Telecom firms that have been named by the CBI and the ED in their charge sheets.
A Delhi court today remanded sacked CWG Organising Committee Chairman Suresh Kalmadi and two others, arrested on charges of cheating, conspiracy and corruption in the award of Games related contracts, in 14 days judicial custody. Special Judge Dharmesh Sharma sent Kalmadi, OC Joint Director General (Sport) A S V Prasad and OC Deputy Director General (Procurement) Surjit Lal to judicial custody till May 18 after the CBI said that some important witnesses are yet to be examined.
Recent past DRI has detected several cases in which bills of entry/shipping bills were processed manually or manual clearance was allowed on EDI documents. Such cases have indicated the possibility of illegal import / export of restricted / prohibited goods and substantial loss of revenue to the Government exchequer. These cases highlight the high propensity to commit fraud and duty evasion that is associated with the manual processing of documents at any stage in the clearance process. It also needs to be noted that neither Directorate of Systems nor Directorate of Valuation are capturing the data relating to exports in respect of non-EDI locations. Most Customs locations have devised their own list of cases for which manual processing is allowed on a regular basis according to public notices and standing orders issued in this regard.
Section 34 of the DRT Act, 1993 (short for ‘Recovery Of Debts Due To Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993’) provides that “the Act to have overriding effect”. Similarly, Section 35 of the Securitisation Act, 2002 (short for ‘The Securitisation and Reconstruction Of Financial Assets and Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002’) provides that “the provisions of this Act to override other laws”. However, on the contrary, Section 37 of the Securitisation Act, 2002 provides that “the application of other laws not barred”. Now, let us consider in detail as to how and when does the “overriding effect” operate.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has clarified that its notification of 31st March, 2011 regarding Companies (Particulars of Employees) Amendment Rules, 2011 raising the limit of employee’s salary to be disclosed in the Directors Reports shall be applicable to all Director’s Reports under Section 217 of the Companies Act, 1956 approved by the Board of Directors on or after April 1st, 2011. It will be irrespective of the accounting year of the annual account, being approved by the Board.
The United States may experience reverse brain drain as thousands of Indian IT professionals contemplate returning to India, according to a survey conducted by Corp-Corp.com , a US-based technology job portal.
The taxpayer was engaged in share trading. During the assessment year 2004-05, the taxpayer had set off the indexed long term capital loss against non-indexed long term capital gains. The Assessing Officer did not allow the set off of indexed long term capital loss against non-indexed long term capital gains. Vipul A. Shah v. ACIT (ITA No 3190/Mum/2010) Mumbai ITAT dated 8 April 2011
Kindly give opinion whether the jurisdiction of civil court is not excluded and the DRT does not have power to decide tenancy and ownership issues? (This has become necessary to convince the Civil Court, before whom a suit is to be filed by the Owner of a Property, whose assets have been attached and auctioned, treating that tenant (borrower) is holding ownership/transferable tenancy rights)
There is no justification on the part of the revenue in retaining the amount of interest earned on the seized amount especially, on the touchstone of the doctrine of accretion.
