Notification No. 9/2012- Customs (N.T.) In exercise of the powers conferred by section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No.88/2011-CUSTOMS (N.T.), dated the 28th December, 2011 vide number S.O.2914(E), dated the 28th December, 2011, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Board of Excise and Customs hereby determines that the rate of exchange of conversion of each of the foreign currency specified in column (2) of each of Schedule I and Schedule II annexed hereto into Indian currency or vice versa shall, with effect from 1st February, 2012
Notification No. 8/2012 – Customs (N.T.) In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (aa) of sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise and Customs, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 12/97-Customs (N.T.), dated the 2nd April, 1997, published in the Gazette of India, vide number G.S.R. 193(E), dated the 2nd April, 1997, namely:-
Based on the references received from banks, we clarify that the revised guidelines issued vide our circulars referred to above would be applicable to domestic savings bank deposits held by residents in India. Further, the interest rates applicable on the domestic savings deposit will be determined on the basis of end-of-day balance in the account. Accordingly, while calculating interest on domestic savings bank deposits, RRBs/StCBs/DCCBs are required to apply the uniform rate set by them on end-of-day balance up to Rs. 1 lakh and for any end-of-day balance exceeding Rs.1 lakh, banks may apply the differential rate(s) as fixed by them.
With a view to give more operational leeway to the AD Category-I banks, it has been decided to dispense with the requirement of prior approval of the Reserve Bank for opening and maintaining each Rupee Vostro account in India of non-resident Exchange Houses in connection with the Rupee Drawing Arrangements (RDAs) that banks enter into with them. Accordingly, AD Category-I banks may take approval of the Reserve Bank the first time they enter into the above arrangement with non-resident Exchange Houses from Gulf countries, Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia. Subsequently, they may enter into RDAs, subject to the prescribed guidelines and inform the Reserve Bank immediately.
In view of the recent measures adopted to provide more flexibility to the Authorised Persons in selecting the location for their branches, it has now been decided to remove the criteria relating to increase in outreach and locational advantage while considering the applications for issuance of fresh licenses for Full Fledged Money Changers (FFMC).
Notification No. LAD-NRO/GN/2011-12/34/2499 These Regulations may be called the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) (Amendment) Regulations, 2012. They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
CIT Vs. Jai Drinks (P.) Ltd. (Delhi HC)- In the instant case, it was held that since the agreement between the assessee and the distributor clearly stated that the agreement was on principal-to-principal basis, payments made by the assessee to the distributor were incentives and discounts and were not to be treated as commission liable for deduction of tax at source under section 194H of the Act.
Echjay Forgings Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2010) 328 ITR 286 (Bombay High Court)- Can expenditure incurred by a company on higher studies of the director’s son abroad be claimed as business expenditure under section 37 on the contention that he was appointed as a trainee in the company under “apprentice training scheme”, where there was no proof of existence of such scheme?
Iskraemeco Regent Ltd. v. CIT (Madras High Court) The assessee company, engaged in the business of development, manufacturing and marketing of electro-mechanical and static energy meters, took a bank loan for purchase of capital assets. The grant of bank loan for purchase of a capital asset is a capital receipt and not a trading receipt. The provisions of section 41(1) are attracted only in case of remission of a trading liability. Since the loan was taken for purchase of capital assets, waiver of a portion of principal would not amount to remission of a trading liability to attract the provisions of section 41(1). Further, such waiver cannot be treated as a benefit arising out of business and consequently, section 28(iv) will not apply in respect of such loan transaction.
Joseph George and Co. Vs. ITO (2010) 328 ITR 161 (Kerala High Court)- On the above issue, it was decided that while lodging is a business, however, letting out of building to the bank on long-term lease could not be treated as business. Therefore, the rental income from bank has to be assessed as income from house property.
