Follow Us :

Archive: 28 January 2012

Posts in 28 January 2012

Live Course on Appeal, Pleading & Drafting under GST by CA Sachin Jain

May 15, 2024 6447 Views 0 comment Print

oin us for an immersive live course led by renowned expert CA Sachin Jain, as we delve into the intricacies of appeal, pleading, and drafting under GST.

IASB and FASB seek to reduce differences in classification and measurement models for financial instruments

January 28, 2012 900 Views 0 comment Print

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) today agreed to work together to seek to reduce differences in their respective classification and measurement models for financial instruments. The discussions will form part of the FASB’s ongoing redeliberation of a proposed Accounting Standards Update on financial instruments, which was originally […]

Waiver of Certain Requirements Relating to Preferential Allotment to Insurance Companies and Mutual Funds

January 28, 2012 588 Views 0 comment Print

Reservation to Holders of Convertible Debt Securities in Rights/Bonus Issues -On the issue of reservation to convertible debt holders in rights/bonus issues, it has been decided to clarify that reservation shall be available only to compulsorily convertible debt holders, since conversion in such cases is not at the option of the holders of these instruments.

Govt to take up Indonesia’s proposal on coal tax

January 28, 2012 633 Views 0 comment Print

The government is trying to take up the issue of Indonesia proposing a tax of exports of coal at bilateral level, Coal Secretary Alok Perti said on Saturday. We have taken up the issues of export tax and restrictions in certain quality of coal by the Indonesian government with the Ministry of External Affairs and Finance Ministry, Perti said on the sidelines of the Fourth Asian Mining Congress and International Exhibition in Kolkata on Saturday.

ITAT can dismiss appeal for non attendance despite issue of notice to attend

January 28, 2012 1603 Views 1 comment Print

Classic Shares & Stock Brooking Services Limited Vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)- This appeal was fixed for hearing on 16.01.2012. However, despite notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor has it moved any application for adjournment. It is, therefore, presumed that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. Accordingly, by applying the ratio laid down by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India (P.) Ltd. [(1991) 38 ITD 320], we dismiss this appeal filed by the Appellant-assessee as not maintainable.

Allowability of bad debts under section 36(1)(vii)

January 28, 2012 9947 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT Vs Ashima Dye cot Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad)- After the amendment of section 36(1)(vii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with effect from April 1, 1989, in order to obtain a deduction in relation to bad debts, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable: it is enough if the bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in the accounts of the assessee.

Would expenditure incurred on feasibility study conducted for examining proposals for technological advancement relating to the existing business be classified as revenue expenditure, where the project was abandoned without creating a new asset?

January 28, 2012 3447 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs. Priya Village Roadshows Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 594 (Delhi) -In this case, the assessee, engaged in the business of running cinemas, incurred expenditure towards architect fee for examining the technical viability of the proposal for takeover of cinema theatre for conversion into a multiplex/ four-screen cinema complexes. The project was, however, dropped due to lack of financial and technical viability. The issue under consideration is whether such expenses can be treated as revenue in nature, since no new asset has been created.

Would the phrase “used for purpose of business” in respect of discarded machine include use of such asset in the earlier years for claim of depreciation under section 32?

January 28, 2012 1534 Views 0 comment Print

CIT v. Yamaha Motor India Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 328 ITR 297 (Delhi) – The issue under consideration in this case is whether depreciation is allowable on the written down value of the entire block, even though the block includes some machinery which has already been discarded and hence, cannot be put to use during the relevant previous year.

Is the assessee entitled to depreciation on value of goodwill considering it as “other business or commercial rights of similar nature” within the meaning of an intangible asset?

January 28, 2012 816 Views 0 comment Print

B. Raveendran Pillai Vs. CIT (2011) 332 ITR 531 (Kerala HC)- Under section 32(1)(ii), depreciation is allowable on intangible assets, being know-how, patents, copyrights, trade marks, license, franchise, or any other business or commercial rights of similar nature.

What can be the tests to determine “substantial part of business” of lending company for the purpose of application of exclusion provision under section 2(22)?

January 28, 2012 1756 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs. Parle Plastics Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 63 (Bom.) Under section 2(22), dividend does not include, inter alia, any advance or loan made to a shareholder by a company in the ordinary course of its business, where the lending of money is a substantial part of the business of the company. The expression used in the exclusion provision of section 2(22) is ‘substantial part of the business’.

Would the procurements of parts and assembling them to make windmill fall within the meaning of “manufacture” and “production” to be entitled for deduction under section 80-IB?

January 28, 2012 1283 Views 0 comment Print

CIT v. Chiranjjeevi Wind Energy Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 192 (Madras High Court)- The Supreme Court, in India Cine Agencies v. CIT(2009) 308 ITR 98, laid down that the test to determine whether a particular activity amounts to “manufacture” or not is whether new and different goods emerge having distinctive name, use and character. Further, the Supreme Court, in CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd. (2004) 271 ITR 331, observed that the word “production” or “produce” when used in comparison with the word “manufacture” means bringing into existence new goods by a process, which may or may not amount to manufacture. It also takes in all the by-products, intermediate products and residual products, which emerge in the course of manufacture of goods.

Search Post by Date
May 2024