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!
F.No.437/20/2011-Cus. IV, Dated the 26th September, 2011 – In terms of Notification No. 15/2002-Customs (N.T.) dated 07.03.2002 (as amended) issued under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Board hereby assigns the Show Cause Notice DRI F.No.856(28)LDH/2009/Pt-XI/3100-3121 dated 09.06.2010 issued by Additional Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit, New Delhi in the case of M/s Agro Impex, 223/24, 1st Floor, Katra Peran,
As decided by SEBI Board in its meeting dated March 22, 2007, SEBI had posted a consultative paper on the ‘Regulation of Investment Advisors’ on its website inviting public comments. Based on public comments received on the consultative paper as also the USAID (Fire Project), a memorandum was placed before the SEBI Board proposing a regulatory approach for Investment Advisors. It was proposed that the Regulations shall be implemented through an SRO. As Investment Advisors offer products across asset classes, it was felt that the respective regulators may take a view and formulate similar norms and code of conduct. Accordingly a reference was made to the HLCC on Financial and Capital Markets.
To benefit eligible borrowers, it has been decided, in consultation with the Government of India, to consider the ECB proposals from foreign equity holders (direct/indirect) and group companies under the approval route as under:- (i) Service sector units, in addition to those in hotels, hospitals and software, could also be considered as eligible borrowers if the loan is obtained from foreign equity holders. This would facilitate borrowing by training institutions, R &D, miscellaneous service companies, etc;
On a review, it has been decided by RBI , to further liberalise the ECB policy in respect of the infrastructure sector.Direct foreign equity holder (holding minimum 25 per cent of the paid-up capital) and indirect foreign equity holder holding atleast 51% of the paid-up capital, will be permitted to provide credit enhancement for the domestic debt raised by Indian companies engaged exclusively in the development of infrastructure and by Infrastructure Finance Companies (IFCs) through issue of capital market instruments. No prior approval will be required from the Reserve Bank for providing such credit enhancements.
Electronic Reservation Slip (ERS) – The printout in standard specified Performa containing reservation particulars, and instructions for use which cn be used by the passenger along with the relevant authorized Identification, as travel authority for performing the journey. Virtual Reservation Message (VRM) – A screen-shot of the e-ticket displayed through laptops/palmtops/ Mobile phone is referred […]
UBD.BPD.(SCB)Cir No. 1/09.18.300/2011-12 – As announced in the Monetary Policy Statement 2011-12, [para 102 – appended], it has been decided to permit scheduled UCBs satisfying certain criteria to provide internet banking facility to their customers. Accordingly, scheduled UCBs having minimum networth of Rs. 100 crore, CRAR of at least 10%, net NPA less than 5% and have earned net profit continuously in the last three financial years are eligible to offer internet banking facility to their customers.
Fraudulent payments in the Accounts of EPFO through fake cheques‑ precautionary measure to avoid fraudulent payment- reg.
DCIT v. Bank of America NT & SA (ITAT Mumbai) – Tribunal held that interest received on income tax refund can be set-off against the interest paid on delayed payment of income tax and only net amount is to be taxed. The issue before the tribunal was that Whether interest income received by the taxpayer on income tax refund can be set-off against delayed payment on income tax? Whether the taxpayer can offer the net interest received as income?
The Tata Power Company Limited Vs ACIT- The Tribunal reiterated that the incidence of liability to pay DDT arises the moment such dividend is distributed (declared) and any subsequent events can have no bearing on such liability, even if such event renders dividend non-taxable in the hands of the recipient. It was not possible to extend the same analogy laid down by the cases cited pertaining to tax-ability of dividend in the hands of shareholder to a case of refund of DDT already paid by the Company declaring dividend.
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 4A of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of l956), the Central Government hereby further to make amendment in the Notification of the Government of India, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, section 3, Sub-section (ii), dated the 13-5-1978 in the erstwhile Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs (Department of Company Affairs) vide Number S.O. 1329, dated the 8-5-1978, namely :‑
