In the instant case, admittedly, sale deed was executed in favour of the respondent-director in the year 1989, while purchasing the land on behalf of the company. The property was mortgaged by the respondent-director in his individual capacity. The parties also came to know about the property being in the name of the respondent-director, when the suit was filed and got settled by respondent-director by redeeming the property.
Vide Order No. 131 dated 26.06.2012 the CBDT has transferred and posted several officers in the grade of Additional/ Joint Commissioners of Income-tax with immediate effect.
The applicant’s counsel submitted that an item of income can be said to have been dealt with in an article of the Treaty only if it defines its scope as well as allocates the right to tax such income between the two Contracting States. Mere exclusion of shipping business profits from article 7 does not amount to dealing with that item of income. We find it difficult to accept this contention. Allocation of taxing right to the source State can well be done by such a process of exclusion. There is no particular manner or methodology of achieving that result.
As regards the applicability of section 14A, it was submitted that the only income by way of dividend on shares was exempt from tax in respect of securities notified for the purpose of section 10(23G). It was submitted that since the said shares were also capable of generating other income in the form of short term capital gain, income from stock lending, income by way of fees for providing of shares, as collateral etc., and it was not a case wherein the borrowed funds were exclusively utilized for making investment in order to earn the exempt dividend income. It was contended that the premium paid on redemption of premium notes, therefore, could not be considered as expenditure incurred in relation to income which did not form part of total income of the assessee companies so as to attract the provisions of section 14A.
A company cannot, at the post-advertisement stage, disturb or unsettle the finality of a finding as to the indisputable nature of a debt rendered at the admission stage of a creditor’s winding up petition. Even though the decision at the admission stage is final as between the company and the petitioning-creditor, others connected with the company who come in after advertisements may question the finding and the Court may not feel constrained that it is bound by the finding.
In order to enhance the quality of financial reporting done by listed entities, it has been decided to put in place, a mechanism to process qualified annual audit reports filed by the listed entities with stock exchanges and Annual Audit Reports where accounting irregularities have been pointed out by Financial Reporting Review Board of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI-FRRB). It has been, inter-alia, decided that:
Note: Export of product listed in Table 1 & Table 2 above through any of the Land Custom Stations (LCSs) situated in the States of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Tripura and Sikkim shall be entitled for additional Duty Credit Scrip @ 1% of FOB value.
Government of India has decided to extend interest subvention of 2% on rupee export credit on specified export sectors from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013. Accordingly, the interest subvention on pre-shipment and post-shipment rupee export credit is extended from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013 on the same terms and conditions as mentioned in our circular dated November 3, 2011 for the following sectors – Handicrafts, Carpets, Handlooms, Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) , Readymade Garments, Processed Agriculture Products, Sport Goods, Toys.
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI), vide its circular dated June 25, 2012 has decided to enhance the existing limit for investment by SEBI registered Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) in Government debt by a further amount of USD 5 billion taking the overall limit for FII investment in Government debt from USD 15 billion to USD 20 billion.
Profitability if considered without considering the positive deviations would lead to impossible profitability positions, which is not what is contemplated under the provisions of 92C. In the circumstances, the Assessing Officer is directed to re-compute the ALP by taking into consideration both the net difference on the sale from the AE and purchase from the AE. The Assessing Officer may look into the fact as to the margins of the profits in regard to the transactions done by the assessee with its AE, as also the non-AE transactions and then compute the adjustment of ALP, if any.
