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.
Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee says lack of external demand is the major reason behind the depleting condition of the Indian rupee in the international market and the government is taking effective measures to improve the condition. He said that India will be soon on the growth trajectory as the present downturn in the economy is a temporary phase.
Circular No. 148/17/2011 – ST dated 13.12.2011: CBEC has clarified the taxability of profit/revenue sharing arrangement in case of distribution of films and exhibition of movies in the following manner:i. Where the arrangement between the distributor/sub-distributor/area distributor and the movie exhibitor/theatre owner in exhibiting the film produced by the producer (the original copyright holder) is on principal to principal basis, service tax liability would be as under:
The Companies Bill, which enhances accountability, introduces the concept of corporate social responsibility and encourages e-governance, was introduced in the Lok Sabha today. The 2011 Bill was introduced by Corporate Affairs Minister M Veerappa Moily after he withdrew a similar legislation of 2009 on the ground that the revised measure incorporating several recommendations and suggestions made by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance and various stakeholders.
CIT v. EHPT India P. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)- Section 10A provides for deduction for profits derived from the export of software for a period of ten years. During the period of tax-holiday, it is desirable that the same method of computing the profits of the STP unit is adopted so that any distortion is avoided. We must however clarify that we are not to be understood as laying down as a proposition that in all cases arising under Section 10A, where the question of apportionment of common/indirect expenses between the taxable and the exempt units arises, the head-count method is the most appropriate method.
Amendment to Schedule XIV to the Companies Act,1956 – Changes in Depreciation Rate on Plant and Machinery. Section 641 of the Companies Act, 1956 – Schedules, forms and rules – Power to alter Schedules – Alterations in Schedule XIV
