The National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), Government of India has formulated guidelines on ensuring disaster resilient construction of buildings and infrastructure financed through banks and other lending institutions (A copy of NDMA guidelines of September 2010 is enclosed). The NDMA has observed that in the context of disaster resilience there are certain critical gaps and the guidelines aim at addressing these gaps in the current process of approving the loan applications. It has been observed that the structural design of the proposed buildings and structures are not completed before submitting the application for a bank loan and no processes are in place at the banks to ensure that disaster resilience has indeed been incorporated in the assets during the design process at least before the construction begins. DBOD.Dir.BC.No.93 /08.12.14/ 2010-11, May 12, 2011
Tivoli Investment and Trading Co vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)- the municipal value or standard rent is not binding on the AO but is a guiding factor for determining the reasonable rent expected to be fetched by the property. If the AO finds that the actual rent received is less than the fair market rent because of the abnormally high interest-free security deposit, he can undertake necessary exercise in that behalf. However, the notional interest on interest free security cannot be taken as determinative factor to arrive at fair rent.
M/s J.K. Aluminium Co vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) – The assessee is a firm engaged in the business of manufacture of aluminum wire rods at IGP, SIDCO, Phase-II Samba, Jammu & Kashmir. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee had filed computation of taxable income wherein deduction u/s 80IB amounting to Rs 5,85,84,089/- was claimed. The A.O went through the details and found that the assessee had received excise duty refund of Rs 5,68,41,800/- during the financial year. The A.O by applying ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT 225 CTR 233 and the decision of ITAT, Amritsar Bench, in the case of M/s Shree Balaji Alloys vs. ITO in ITA No.255/Asr/2009 for the assessment year 2005-06 did not accept the assessee’ s claim for relief u/s 80IB of the Act in relation thereto. When this was proposed to the assessee, the assessee furnished a judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dharampal Premchand Ltd. 317 ITR 353 wherein this issue has been claimed to have been decided in its favour. The A.O, however, taking support from the decision of the Supreme Court, went on to disallow the claim of the assessee in respect of this excise duty refund. On Appeal Honorable ITAT Allow the claim of the Assessee relying on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd.
Vide Order No. 85 of 2011 dated 11.5.2011, the CBDT has transferred & posted Commissioners & Directors of Income-tax. Order No. 85 of 2011 dated 11.5.2011
It has come to the notice of the Ministry that some companies are making applications for getting prior approval of Central Government when they propose to make any loan to, or give any guarantee or provide any security in connection with a loan made by any other person to a Public Limited Company of which any such Director is a Director or a member even when the proposal does not fall under Section 295(d) and Section 295(e) of the Companies Act, 1956. General Circular No. 24/2011, Dated: – 12th May, 2011
Gujarat High Court has issued notices to the Union Ministry of Finance and the Income Tax department in response to petitions by two companies of Adani Group, challenging the imposition of Minimum Alternative Tax (MAT) through an amendment in the Finance Act, 2011. The notices were issued yesterday by the division bench of Chief Justice S J Mukhopadhaya and Justice J B Pardiwala while hearing the petitions by Mundra Port Special Economic Zone Ltd (MPSEZL) and Adani Power Ltd (APL). Next hearing is scheduled for July 8.
