Based on the recommendations of Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) in its meeting held on July 6, 2011, Government has approved 31 Proposals of Foreign Direct Investment amounting to Rs. 3844.70 crore approximately.
Result of the Information Systems Audit [ISA] Assessment Test held on 18th June, 2011 declared. For Result Click here- -Merit List- ISA Merit List – Old Pattern
NOTIFICATION No.34/2011-CENTRAL EXCISE – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No.64/95-Central Excise, dated the 16th March, 1995 which was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide number G.S.R.256(E), dated the 16th March, 1995, namely:-
NOTIFICATION NO. 64/2011-Customs., Dated: July 19, 2011 -In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 39/96-Customs, dated the 23rd July, 1996, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide number G.S.R. 291(E), dated the 23rd July, 1996, namely:-
Notification No. 63/2011-Customs In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 21/2002-Customs, dated the 1st March, 2002 which was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide G.S.R. 118 (E) of the same date, namely: –
NOTIFICATION NO. 62/2011-Customs Whereas, the designated authority vide notification No. 15/20/2010-DGAD, dated the 9th December, 2010, published in Part I, Section 1 of the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, dated the 9th December, 2010, has initiated review, in terms of sub-section (5) of section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) and in pursuance of rule 23 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the said rules), in the matter of continuation of anti-dumping duty on ‘Saccharin’, falling under heading 29251100 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), originating in, or exported from, the China PR imposed vide notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue),No. 41/2007-Customs, dated the 19th March, 2007, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R.206 (E), dated the 19th March, 2007, and has requested for extension of anti-dumping duty upto one more year, in terms of sub-section (5) of Section 9A of the said Customs Tariff Act;
CIRCULAR NO. 144/13/2011-ST Dated: July 18, 2011 Representations requesting clarification on ‘completion of service’ as provided under the Point of Taxation Rules, 2011 and Service Tax Rules, 1994 have been received from certain sections of service providers that in many situations it is not possible to issue invoices within 14 days of the completion of the service since the exact date of completion of service is difficult to identify. Instances have been given where after the task of providing the service may be physically accomplished, but certain other formalities are required to be completed from the client’s end before an invoice can be issued.
TRIAD GESTCO LTD. VERSUS HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Canada Tax Court) – The transactions undertaken by the appellant amount to abusive tax avoidance because they defeat the underlying rationale of the capital loss provisions in the Act. Through the manipulation of the fiscal ‘amount’ of the Rcongold common shares, the appellant created artificially devalued property that was transferred to a person within the same economic unit to create an artificial capital loss without incurring any real economic loss. On August 27, 2002, the appellant owned shares of Rcongold which had a fair market value of $8 million (the common shares). On August 28, 2002, the appellant continued to own shares of Rcongold which had a fair market value of $8 million (the Class ‘E’ shares) and after the disposition of the common shares of Rcongold to the PCT, the appellant continued to own shares in Rcongold having a fair market value of $8 million.
CIT vs. Cosmo Films Ltd (Delhi High Court) – High Court observed that if the sale and lease back agreement between the assessee and the OSEB indicate that the assessee had purchased the plant and machinery from OSEB for a price and had leased out the same to OSEB on lease rent, the revenue department cannot discard the said sale and lease back agreement on the ground that the underlying motive of the assessee to enter into the said transaction was to reduce its income-tax liability.
Union Minister of Corporate Affairs Dr. M. Virappa Moily today presented the ICWAI 8th National Awards for excellence in Cost Management 2010 to the representatives of leading industrial organisations both in the public sector as well as the private sector at Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi. Speeking on the occasion the minister said Cost leadership is an essential ingredient for all business whether in manufacturing of services sector. Cost Management is therefore an important aspect for any organization to provide a base for its efforts to be in position to excel.
