ACAE in association with IDTPF, STAR and TAXGURU announces its most awaited GST CERTIFICATE COURSE. This year’s course is on litigation and is titled LITIGATION SERIES. The Course will be held online on ZOOM from Aug 6th, 2024 to Aug 17th, 2024 (except 11th Aug and 15th Aug) from 5 PM to 7 PM. The […]
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!
No exhaustive and compact definition of the phrase ‘transfer pricing’ is possible nor has it been attempted in the legislations in the countries that have tried to find solutions to this menace. When transfers by way of sales exchange, etc. are made between two independent entities unconnected with each other as normal business deals, there can hardly be any scope of alleging any malpractice or hidden motives in price fixation.
Section 192 of the I.T. Act, 1961 provides that every person responsible for paying any income which is chargeable under the head ‘salary’, shall deduct income tax on the estimated income of the assessee under the head salaries. The tax is required to be calculated at the average rate of income tax as computed on the basis of the rates in force.
The CS Result December 2011 of Foundation, Executive & Professional Level would be announced on 25th Feb 2012 and would be published at all branches of ICSI. The CS Result December 2011 can also be viewed online on the following website.
Karnataka Government Insurance Department V. ACCE (Karnatka HC)- Activities performed by sovereign/public authorities under the provision of law, which are in the nature of statutory obligations which are to be fulfilled in accordance with law are exempt from levy of service tax. The fee collected by them for performing such activities is in the nature of compulsory levy as per the provisions of the relevant statute and it is deposited into the Government treasury. Such activity is purely in public interest and it is undertaken as mandatory and statutory function. It is in those cases, service tax is not leviable. Insurance business is not a sovereign act. No fee is collected for performing such statutory functions.
JDIT Vs. Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi)- The stand taken by the appellant in its return of income has been upheld by the ld. High Court. Since, the quantum additions in both the assessment years under appeal has already been deleted by the ld. ITAT, no penalty can be levied u/s 271(1)(c) for either concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Therefore, the AO is directed to delete the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) for A.Ys. 2003- 04 & 2004- 05. We are of the view that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case where the entire addition has been deleted the order of the CIT(A) holding that the penalty order does not survive cannot be faulted with.
CCE Vs. Tata Advanced Materials Ltd. (Karnataka HC)- Merely because the Insurance Company paid the assessee the value of goods including the excise duty paid, that would not render the availment of the cenvat credit wrong or irregular. At the same time, it does not confer any right on the Excise Department to demand reversal of credit or default to pay the said amount.
Newly registered dealer shall submit the requisite annexures along with the last return for the said year i.e. alongwith the return for the period in which 31st March of that year occur. Whereas, the dealer whose business is discontinued, disposed off or transferred shall alongwith his last monthly, quarterly or six-monthly return submit the requisite annexures.
Inaugurating the Conference, Mr. U K Sinha, Chairman, SEBI called for more research in the field of investor education. He also said that the various financial regulators in India and the Government of India are working together in the formulation of a National Policy on Financial Education.
B. Chandramathi Vs. N. Prakash (SC)- Appellant is about 51 years of age. She is a poor widow who is eking out a living for herself and her family by making jowar rotis and selling them. She is the only earning member of her family. She has two children to look after. It appears that the appellant is unwell. She is stated to have suffered from depression. As of today, the appellant has undergone the sentence for a period of about 2 months before she was released on bail.
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (6) of section 10 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (Mah. IX of 2005) and in supersession of the order No. DC (A & R)/ VAT/PWR(INV)/2006/3/Adm-6 dated 9th August 2011, the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra State, Mumbai, is hereby pleased to delegate the powers and duties under sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 64 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 and rule 69 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, to the following authorities specified in column (2), holding the posts specified in column (3) of the Schedule appended to this order for the period during which such authority continue to hold such post :—
