Kindly note that the last date for filing the Form 23B without fee has been extended for two weeks. Fee shall be charged on any eForm 23B filed on or after 5th August, 2012. You are therefore advised to file the pending eForms within the time limit to avoid any last minute rush.
Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) vide its Notification No. 9/2012 dated 17th February, 2012 has exempted salaried employees from the requirement of filing the returns for assessment year 2012-13. The exemption is applicable only if all the following conditions are fulfilled:- • Employee has earned only salary income and income from savings bank account and the annual interest earned from savings bank account is less than Rs. 10 thousand. • The total Income of the employee does not exceed Rs. 5 Lakh (Total Income means Gross Total Income Less deductions under Chapter VIA).
In the Tribunal decision rendered in the case of Srivatsan Surveyors (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 32 SOT 268 (Chennai) the issue was decided against the assessee on the basis that the depreciation on restrictive covenant is ‘a right in persona’ and not a ‘right in rem’ and, hence, depreciation on it is not allowable as per the provisions of section 32(1)(ii). In that case, Rs. 1 crore was paid to one of the directors on the basis of non-compete covenant entered into between the assessee-company and its director R. Srivatsan, as per which the said director agreed not to carry on his individual business of general insurance survey, loss assessment, valuation of assets, etc., for a period of seven years.
Q.1. If there is mismatch between the actual tax deducted and the amount shown in form 26AS, how to get it rectified and claim the balance? It is advised to claim the actual tax deducted in the return. Such mismatch will be handled in accordance with Instruction No. 4/2012, in the following manner: (a) Where difference between claim and amount reported in AS-26 does not exceed Rs. 5,000, the claim shall be accepted; (b) Where zero claim is matching, the credit shall be allowed only after due verification by department; (c) Where there is claim with invalid TAN, the TDS credit for such claim is not to be allowed; and d) In all other cases, the credit shall be allowed after due verification by the department.
ICAI today announced the following results – Chartered Accountants Final Examination held in May, 2012. Common Proficiency Test (Paper Pencil Mode) held on June 17, 2012.
In the assessee is entitled to receive interest on refund which is out of any tax. As a matter of fact, the refund arises only on tax portion. There is misconception in the interpretation of the Assessing Officer that interest can be paid only on the tax portion in the refund and not on the entire amount of refund. Moreover, section 244A doesn’t distinguish that the assessee shall be entitled to receive interest only on tax portion in the refund and not on the entire amount of refund as projected by the revenue.
This year no return receipt counters are set up at Pragati Maidan, instead Returns will be received at Civic Centre, opposite Ramlila Ground, New Delhi, on 26th, 27th, 30th July, 2012 (10:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.) & on 31st July, 2012 (10:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M.).
The time taken for clearing of cheques and Government holidays and reasonable cause etc. are not the reasons, which could be considered while levying the interest against the assessee
In the present case, what is apparent is that the lessee (assessee) paid a substantial amount (Rs. 2.53 crores) in 1989 at the time of entering into the transaction. It was a precondition for securing possession; the amount was one-time consideration in terms of the lease condition. In addition, the lessee has to pay 2.5% of the said amount as annual rent, which is subject to increase periodically. No doubt, the assessee argues that the annual rent is depressed, and does not reflect the market rent.
The appellant was a franchisee of BCCI-IPL and received payment from BCCI-IPL as its share in receipts towards media rights and other income collected centrally by BCCI-IPL. The key issue in the appeal was whether the amount received by the appellant from BCCI-IPL liable to service tax as business support services provided to BCCI-IPL.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 | ||||
