Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
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!
The whole case revolves upon the lease deed dated 24.12.2004 executed between the lessor, Smt. Sudha Saraswat and the assessee-society through which the land measuring 5150.48 sq. meter was let out to assessee society for 30 years. Copy of the lease deed is appended with the assessment order. The assessee paid Rs. 10,000/- as premium and agreed to pay Rs. 150/- per month as rent of the demised property, i.e., 1800/- per annum.
There is no much substance in the first argument as to aspect of lack of jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court to entertain the criminal complaint of respondent No.2. This is so, in view of the factual position as to major transaction between the complainant and the accused took place at Mumbai though the complainant is resident of Rajkot, so also the accused Nos. 1 to 4, 8,9,13 to 18 are resident of Kolkata
When a company having contracts worth Rs.1000 crores pending with it for execution bags a few new projects through the tendering process such information need not necessarily be price sensitive.
Tribunal is not empowered to pass an order ‘thereon’ on the subject-matter which is not in appeal as per the appeal memo to be adjudicated upon. As far as the question of withdrawal of cross-objection is concerned, in the light of the above discussion, had the cross-objection was not withdrawn, even then, such a legal issue was beyond the scope of the adjudication through a cross-objection under section 253(4) because the impugned legal issue was altogether an independent as well as a separate issue.
In order to have better understanding of the circular, it is clarified that the time limit of 60 days shall be read as 122 days for filing of Form 11 by LLPs in respect of the Financial Year ending on 31.03.2012. This circular shall be effective from.
Circular No. 160/11/2012-ST There has been some doubt regarding the applicability of provisions of the Finance Act, 2004 relating to education cess and the Finance Act, 2007 relating to secondary and higher education cess as the concerned Acts make reference to section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994, which shall cease to have effect from July 1, 2012. In this connection, as also in general, you may kindly refer to the sub-section (1) of section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 which reads as under:
(1) The exporter shall declare the amount of commission paid or payable to the commission agent in the shipping bill or bill of export, as the case may be. (2) The exemption shall be limited to the service tax calculated on a value of ten per cent of the free on board value of export goods for which the said service has been used. (3) The exemption shall not be available on the export of canalised item, project export, or export financed under lines of credit extended by the Government of India or EXIM Bank, or export made by Indian partner in a company with equity participation in an overseas joint venture or wholly owned subsidiary.
In continuation of MCA’s General Circular No. 8/2012 dated 10th May, 2012, it has been decided that filing of Cost Audit Reports and Compliance Reports with the Central Government in the XBRL mode shall be allowed after 31st July, 2012. The Institute is requested to circulate this for the information of all concerned.
On a perusal of the impugned order dated 4-3-2009, however, it is found that although the respondents cited the judgment of the Court in Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Ved Prakash Aggarwal [2009] 91 SCL 281 (SC) and contended before the MRTP Commission that the MRTP Commission had no authority to order handing over of possession and that the jurisdiction was only with the civil court to order specific performance of the contract, the MRTP Commission has observed that this contention cannot be dealt with while passing the interim order and can only be decided at the time of final adjudication of the complaint. Hence, the Court is not called upon to decide the question as to whether the MRTP Commission has power to direct handing ove
In continuation of this office O.M. of even number dated L03.2011 the undersigned is directed to say that Chairman, SEBI or his nominee shall also be the member of the Committee with immediate effect to formulate a policy document on Corporate Governance.
