Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Archive: 09 May 2011

Posts in 09 May 2011

Housing Loan limit under priority sector increased from Rs. 20 lakh to 25 lakh w.e.f. April 01, 2011

May 9, 2011 1517 Views 0 comment Print

RPCD.CO.Plan.BC.69/04.09.01/2010-11 Pursuant to the announcement made by Union Finance Minister in paragraph 44 of the budget for the year 2011-12, it has been decided to increase the above limit from Rs.20 lakh to Rs.25 lakh. The above change will be applicable to housing loans sanctioned on or after April 1, 2011. RBI/2010-11/517 RPCD.CO.Plan.BC.69/04.09.01/2010-11

Companies (Amendment) Regulations, 2011 vide notification dated 9th May, 2011

May 9, 2011 3165 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1),(2),(5) and (8) of section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), the Central Government hereby makes the following regulations further to amend the Companies Regulations, 1956, namely:- 1. (1) These regulations may be called the Companies (Amendment) Regulations, 2011.(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.2. In the Companies Regulations, 1956 (herein after referred to as the said regulations), in Part B, in regulation 3, 5, 7, 9 and 14, for the word “Regional Director”, the word “Registrar of Companies” shall be substituted.

No prior notice needed for seizing bank account during criminal investigation

May 9, 2011 8614 Views 0 comment Print

Mr.Vinoskumar Ramachandran vs The State Of Maharashtra – The Bombay high court has ruled that when a bank account is sought to be seized during criminal investigation, the account-holder need not be given prior notice. In this case, Essar Logistics vs Vinoskumar, the account holder argued that natural justice demanded that he should be given notice before freezing his account. The division bench of the high court rejected his contention and remarked: It would indeed be absurd to suggest that a person must be told that his bank account, which is suspected of having been used in the commission of an offence by himself or even by another, is being frozen to allow him to have it closed or to have its proceeds withdrawn or transferred upon such notice.

HC can only interpret a notification, it can not alter the same – SC

May 9, 2011 916 Views 0 comment Print

State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. – The Supreme Court has set aside the judgment of the Allahabad high court, stating that the high court had inserted words in a Uttar Pradesh notification which it had no power to do. The court should only interpret provisions of tax laws; it should not take over the role of the supervisor or legislator, the court stated in the judgment, State of UP vs Mahindra & Mahindra. The case arose when the tractor manufacturer moved the high court seeking exemption in the sale/excise duty for tractor engines specifying cubic capacity not exceeding 1800 cc. The high court allowed the writ petition. The government appealed to the Supreme Court. It remitted the matter to the excise tribunal for reconsideration, asking it not to alter the scope of the state notification.

Mortgage suit can not be referred for settlement through arbitration

May 9, 2011 8118 Views 0 comment Print

Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc. Vs. SBI Home Finance Ltd. & Ors.- All disputes are not capable of settlement through arbitration; some by nature have to be adjudicated by courts, according to the Supreme Court. A suit for sale, foreclosure or redemption of mortgaged property should be tried by a court and not by arbitral tribunal, the court stated in the judgment, Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. Vs SBI Home Finance Ltd. In this case, two firms took loan from SBI to buy flats in Mumbai and they entered into leave and licence agreements with Booz. The borrowers did not repay the loan and so SBI filed a mortgage suit before the Bombay high court. Booz moved the high court for arbitration which was dismissed. Its appeal was also dismissed by the Supreme Court. It stated that a court where the mortgage suit is pending should not refer the parties to arbitration as it is not an “arbitrable” issue. This is so because only a court can protect the interests of third parties. Arbitration deals with only disputes between parties to the arbitration agreement. The court gave similar instances where arbitration should not be attempted, like insolvency and winding up matters, tenancy, wills, criminal offences, matrimonial disputes and guardianship issues.

Appeal Forms of Customs, Central Excise, Service Tax, Customs Tariff (Anti Dumping Duty)

May 9, 2011 4987 Views 0 comment Print

Download Appeal Forms under Customs Act, Central Excise Act, Finance Act (Service Tax) and under Customs Tariff Act 1975 (Anti Dumping Duty). Form No. S.T.-5, Form No. S.T.-6, Form No. S.T.-7, Form No. E.A.-3, Form No. E.A.-4, Form No. E.A.-5, Form No. C.A.-3, Form No. C.A.-4, Form No. C.A.-5

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031