Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Archive: 30 May 2012

Posts in 30 May 2012

Live Course on 360 degree Analysis of Input Tax Credit from a Litigation Perspective

July 14, 2024 2472 Views 0 comment Print

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!

Disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii)(proviso) applicable to extension of existing business and not to setting up altogether different or new business

May 30, 2012 5912 Views 0 comment Print

The ld. counsel for the assessee contended that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the disallowance of interest for the reason that the assessee was already doing its business from a rented premises. The new office premises and godown were stated to have been added in the current year to carry on the same business. It has thus been canvassed that the mandate of proviso to section 36(1)()iii) will not apply.

Unused urban land held by assessee for industrial purposes not assessable to Wealth Tax for a period of two years from the date of acquisition

May 30, 2012 1060 Views 0 comment Print

Notification has permitted the development of the land only for hotel; therefore, after the said notification, the land in question cannot be developed other than hotel and there is no dispute on this point that the land was finally developed by constructing the hotel by the assessee. Even, the MCGB vide its letter dated 10.6.1994 has acknowledged this fact that 50% of the land in question is reserved for recreation ground and the remaining 50% is deleted from the reservation and placed in Local Commercial Zone (C-I) for specific purpose of Hotel projects only.

Where assessee is payee and not payer, no question of its defaulting in TDS deduction u/s 194J arises

May 30, 2012 2060 Views 0 comment Print

It is necessary that the assessee or the person concerned liable to deduct and pay the TDS must be responsible for paying to a resident any sum, by way of fees for professional services, fees for technical services, royalty or any sum referred to in clause (va) of sec. 28. Whereas just contrary to the said conditions, in the instant case, the assessee company has not paid even a single penny to its super stockiest. Rather, it is just the opposite. The super stockist is paying to the assessee company for the produce of Drugs.

If a particular sum is not income, requirement of making TDS non-existent

May 30, 2012 1219 Views 0 comment Print

Section 201(1) uses the expression ‘any person, who is required to deduct any sum in accordance with the provisions of the Act…..’. Assessee’s stand was that there was no such requirement. As per the provisions of section 194C, an amount has to be deducted out of the sum in pursuance to a contract, at the time of payment/credit towards income-tax on the income comprised therein in terms of section 194C. When a particular sum is not income at all for an assessee, the requirement of making TDS is non-existent.

Penalty Us/ 271D applies only when Assessee accepts cash Loan Exceeding Rs. 20,000/- from a person

May 30, 2012 4248 Views 0 comment Print

Secs. 271C, 271D and 271E, which were inserted in the I T Act w.e.f. 1st April, 1989, by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, provided for the levy of penalties for certain defaults. Penalty under s. 271C was levied for failure to deduct tax at source. Penalty under s. 271D may be levied for failure to comply with the provisions of s. 269SS i.e. for taking or accepting any loan or deposit in excess of Rs. 20,000 otherwise than by an account payee cheque or bank draft. Penalty under s. 271E may be levied for failure to comply with the provisions of s. 269T relating to repayment by a company, including a banking company, a co-operative society or a firm, of deposits, including interest, exceeding Rs. 20,000/- the aggregate otherwise than by an account payee cheque or bank draft.

Providing sports facilities to general public without restriction to any caste, creed, religion or profession eligible for exemption U/S. 11

May 30, 2012 2101 Views 0 comment Print

This Court had the occasion to consider similar issues in a Judgment delivered in the case of DIT (Exemption) v. Chembur Gymkhana [Income Tax Appeal No. 5568 of 2010, dated 13-2-2012]. This Court, following the law laid down by the Supreme Court, has held that the fact that the membership of the club is open to a section of the community would not detract from the fact that the club has been constituted for the advancement of any other object of general public utility.

Claim of Assessee that he never received Notice not tenable if he attends on date fixed for hearing

May 30, 2012 4292 Views 0 comment Print

The only question that arises for our consideration is whether the notice issued on 30.12.2004 under Section 143(2) of the Act was validly served upon the assessee-firm on 31.12.2004 as claimed by the Assessing Officer. We proceed on the assumption that the notice was not served on either of the two partners of the assessee-firm and that it was served on some person who was not specifically authorised to receive notice. Even so, we are not persuaded to hold that there was no valid service of the notice upon the assessee-firm.

SEBI – Exit Policy for De-recognized/ Non-operational Stock Exchanges

May 30, 2012 1842 Views 0 comment Print

EBI vide circular dated December 29, 2008 issued guidelines in respect of exit option to stock exchanges. The exit policy of aforesaid exchanges has been reviewed by the Board and the said Circular stands revised/modified to the extent as under.

DGFT – Exemption for export of pulses to the Republic of Maldives

May 30, 2012 264 Views 0 comment Print

Notification No. 118 (RE-2010)/2009-2014 73 MTs of pulses for the year 2012-13 and 80 MTs of pulses for the year 2013-14 to the Republic of Maldives would be permitted to be exported through MMTC Ltd.

RBI- Uniformity in Risk weight for assets covering PPP and post COD projects

May 30, 2012 535 Views 0 comment Print

The Reserve Bank, vide its notification No.DNBS.233/CGM(US)-2011 dated November 21, 2011 viz; Infrastructure Debt Fund-Non-Banking Financial Companies (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2011 issued detailed guidelines with regard to regulation of IDF-NBFCs.In terms of the Guidelines,for the purpose of computing capital adequacy, IDF-NBFCs are permitted to assign a risk weight of 50 percent on bonds covering PPP and post commercial operations date (COD) projects in existence over a year of commercial operation.

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031