Notification No. 87/2011 – Customs (N. T.) In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Board, being satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do, hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 36/2001-Cus (N. T.), dated, the 3rd August 2001, namely: –
Enforcement Directorate questioned Sanjay Chandra, Unitech MD and an accused in the 2G spectrum allocation scam recently over investments made in a tax haven abroad.Chandra, who was recently released on bail in the case, has been questioned by ED twice regarding an investment by his firm worth about Rs 230 crore in the Isle of Man.
Income-tax Officer Vs. North East Enterprises (P) Ltd. (ITAT Kolkata)- As observed by the ld. A.O., the receipts of Rs. 50 lakhs and Rs.41,50,000/- ICD for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 respectively were not satisfactorily explained before him, which led him to make addition of the said amounts as assessee’s undisclosed investment. In our considered opinion, while deciding the issue the ld. C.I.T.(A) ought to have called for the remand report as the receipts of ICD amounts were not satisfactorily explained before the ld. A.O., which were shown as payments.
Here are some of the things to do for while handling the entire income tax refund process so that you can receive the same quickly:- File the income tax return in time – The entire tax refund process starts with them taking some specific action. For any tax payer, doing nothing will not yield any result in any benefit on the tax front. Thus if there is some outcome desired, then there will have to be efforts to get that particular outcome. When it comes to the question of getting an income tax refund, the first thing that has to be done is to file an income tax return which mentions all the correct figures about the income, deductions and tax paid. This will result in a demand for the refund based on documentary evidence.
Smart Projects (P) Ltd. v. ITO (ITAT Delhi) – Assessee company has duly submitted all requisite documentary evidences before the Authorities below so as to discharge its onus of establishing the identity and credit worthiness of the shareholders and the genuineness of the transactions. That being so, looked at from any angle, the addition has wrongly been made in the hands of the assessee company, though the same ought to have been made, if at all, in the hands of the shareholders, as held in ‘Lovely Exports’.
Since the assessment year involved in this appeal is 2005-06 Rule 8D of the IT Rules is not applicable in the present case keeping in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Pvt. Ltd. In this case the ld. CIT-Admn has issued jurisdiction u/s 263 of the IT Act based on the order of the ITAT, Special Bench, which has been subsequently over ruled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court (supra). Therefore we are of the view that invoking of provision of section 263 of the IT Act is not justifiable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence we squash the order of ld. CIT-Admn and allow the appeal of assessee.
Notification No. 89 (RE-2010)/2009-14 – The stipulation that raw material for export of meat and meat products must be sourced exclusively from APEDA registered abattoir/integrated abattoir will come into effect on 15.06.2012, instead of 31.10.2011.
