ub clause (i) of Rule 28AA (1) refers to the average rate of tax as determined by the total tax payable on estimated income as reduced by advance tax and TDS as a % of the payment referred to in section 197 for which application has been made. Sub clause (ii) refers to the average of the average rates of tax paid by the assessee in the last 3 years. Hence in the present case sub clause (ii) will not apply and sub clause (i) will apply. Failure of assessee to file e-TDS return may result in independent consequence in law including penal consequences under section 271 but does not justify rejection of an application filed for lower deduction of tax under sec 197.
The assessee was engaged in the business of marine dredging and port construction. It was awarded a contract at Visakhapatnam Port Trust. For the purpose of executing the contract of dredging the assessee hired equipment from MA, Netherlands. During the relevant AYs, the assessee made payments to “MA” in respect of usage of the equipment. The AO was of the view that the equipment hired by the company constituted PE of the Netherland entity, MAin India. The AO held the assessee to be in default within the meaning of section 201 since it had not deducted tax at source u/s 195. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), however, set aside the order of the AO. DDIT v. Dharti Dredging & Infrastructural Ltd
ADIT Mumbai vs Tata Communications – Copyright article is distinct from copyright per se and payment for copyright article, therefore, cannot be treated as payment of copyright, which could be brought to tax. Liability to deduct tax is a vicarious liability and it can be invoked only when primary liability survives. Since the US company itself did not have any tax liability in respect of the payments, the vicarious tax liability did not survive either
A recent circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Circular No. 2/2011 [ F. No. 385/25/2010-IT(B)] (new Circular) dated 27 April 2011, outline the procedure for refund of excess payment of tax deducted at source (TDS) from payments to residents. The new Circular is applicable for refunds pertaining to the period up to 31 March 2010. The procedure for refunds for the period from 1 April 2010 is governed by a specific provision in the Indian Tax Laws (ITL) dealing with centralized processing of quarterly TDS statements. The refund for the period after 1 April 2010 will be granted based on data furnished in the statements, subject to rectification of apparent inconsistencies, without the requirement of a separate claim for refund.
If the taxpayer was not required to deduct tax at source and could not be declared assessee in default, the question whether the payment was in the nature of fees for technical services or in the nature of reimbursement for the expenses incurred or whether the Tax Treaty overrides the provisions of the ITA, need not be gone into.
Greater efforts to support girls and young women to acquire skills in information and communications technologies (ICTs) could help address projected shortages of manpower in those professions, the United Nations telecommunications agency said today, marking the first “Girls in ICT Day.”
Concerned over rising incidents of cyber crime, the Reserve Bank of India has suggested banks to put in place a strong whistle blowing system as well as reward employees who help prevent frauds. Appropriate mechanisms need to be established in banks…including transaction monitoring teams in banks and to investigate them (disputes or suspicions raised by stakeholders) thoroughly. Banks should have a well publicised whistle blowing mechanism, RBI said.
Calculator to calculate Capital Gain on Sale of Shares and Mutual Funds – LTCG, STCG
HARSHENDRA KUMAR D. V. REBATILATA KOLEY ETC In our judgment, the above observations cannot be read to mean that in a criminal case where trial is yet to take place and the matter is at the stage of issuance of summons or taking cognizance, materials relied upon by the accused which are in the nature of public documents or the materials which are beyond suspicion or doubt, in no circumstance, can be looked into by the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 or for that matter in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code. It is fairly settled now that while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 or revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code in a case where complaint is sought to be quashed, it is not proper for the High Court to consider the defence of the accused or embark upon an enquiry in respect of merits of the accusations. However, in an appropriate case, IF ON THE FACE OF THE DOCUMENTS
Section 637 of the Companies Act, 1956 – Delegation by Central Government of its powers and functions under Act – Powers & functions delegated to Registrar of Companies for specified provisions of Act – Corrigendum to Notification No. G.S.R. 222(E), dated 17-3-2011. CORRIGENDUM [F.NO. 5/7/2011-CL V], DATED 1-5-2011
