Banks are advised that KYC once done by one branch of the bank should be valid for transfer of the account within the bank as long as full KYC has been done for the concerned account. The customer should be allowed to transfer his account from one branch to another branch without restrictions. In order to comply with KYC requirements of correct address of the person, fresh address proof may be obtained from him/her upon such transfer by the transferee branch. It may be noted that instructions regarding periodical updation of KYC data in terms of para 2.4(e) and those on maintenance of records of identity and transaction in terms of para 2.21(iii) of our Master circular DBOD.AML.BC. No.2/14.01.001/ 2009-10 dated July 01, 2011 remain unchanged and banks will be required to carry out the updation at prescribed intervals as also maintain records of transactions and verification of identity as prescribed.
Pursuant to the announcement made by Union Finance Minister in the Union Budget for the year 2012-13, it has been decided to increase the limit from Rs.5 lakh to Rs.10 lakh for the bank loans extended to non-governmental agencies, approved by NHB for their refinance, for on-lending for the purpose of construction/reconstruction of individual dwelling units or for slum clearance and rehabilitation of slum dwellers.
SEBI has been allocating FII debt limits through open bidding platform since February 2009 as and when free limits are available. The utilisation status of FII debt limits and the free limits available as on 15th of every month and at the end of every month are being disseminated on SEBI website.
Notification No. 28/ 2012 – Customs In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No.69/2011-Customs dated the 29th July, 2011 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 593 (E), dated the 29th July, 2011, namely:-
G.S.R. (E).- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No.69/2011-Customs dated the 29th July, 2011 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 593 (E), dated the 29th July, 2011, namely:-
To avail exemption under section 11(1)(d) in respect of Voluntary contributions made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust/institution, identity of donor(s) must be established- If identity of donors not established, there is no question of the donations having been received with such a direction since such a direction could be validly given by the donor only at the time of giving the donation.
CIT v. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Amendment in the clause (a) of section 251(1) has been made so as to provide that the Commissioner (Appeals) may not set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making fresh assessment with a view to help bringing an early finalization of the assessment, it cannot be assumed that the Commissioner (Appeals) is divested of the power to annul the assessment and then to pass appropriate consequential order. In the instant case, the factual aspect has been that the order as passed by the Assessing Officer which was subject of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), was not an original order of assessment but was an order of assessment passed after remand by the Tribunal. The directions in remand order having not been complied with, the course as adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot be said to be de hors the powers available to him under the statute.
Assessee is engaged in processing of unusable gas cylinders, though there is nothing to indicate that the gas cylinders are completely ‘broken’; in fact, none of the processes stated to have be undertaken address the same. However, as apparent, it is only where the processing leads to a commercially new product that it can be said that manufacture has taken place.
In the case of ACIT vs. Bony Polymers Pvt. Ltd. (supra), it was held by the Co-ordinate Bench that in the absence of any material or evidence to show that the commission is being paid as dividend to the shareholders the disallowance u/s 36 (1)(ii) was not permissible. The Companies Act, 1956 contains the limitation and restrictions in the matter of payment of dividend and such obligation of the company either to pay or not to pay dividend cannot be assumed. The Assessing Officer cannot presume that had this commission not paid would have necessarily being paid as dividend to the shareholders.
Ordinarily, it is not incumbent on the part of the Tribunal to adjourn the case again when a last opportunity had already been granted to the Counsel for assessee, however, there may be number of circumstances where adjournment becomes necessary, in the interest of justice.
