Join our free webinar on July 4th at 4:00 PM to gain insights into the dematerialization of securities and recent amendments. Register now for key updates.
Join our free webinar on July 7 at 5 PM for insights into 10 recent High Court income tax judgments favoring assessees. Expert analysis by CA Dipak Dama.
1. A common simplified registration format for Central Excise and Service Tax is being placed for public comments, together with further liberalization in registration requirements, particularly centralized registrations. The proposed changes are attached as Annexure C. 2. Likewise a new simplified one page common return with Central Excise: to be called Excise & Service Tax Return (EST for short) is being introduced. The format of the return is given as Annexure D. It is also being proposed that the cycles for the payment service tax and filing of return should coincide.
The Law of evidence plays a pivotal role in the effective functioning of the judicial system. The existence of substantive rights can only be established by relevant and admissible evidence. Relevancy of facts is the key to determine the outcome of the judicial process which is based on fair trial without fear or favor and upholding the Principles of Natural Justice Human Rights and Fundamental rights. Hence the importance of evidence neither be overlooked nor be ignored. The proof of evidence comes out of documents and the establishment of relevant evidence is through the inspection of documents. Hence the documents and inspection of documents are very important and very essential to establish the truth and to bring Justice.
it is noticed that the assessment is an ex-parte assessment and also before the ld. CIT(A) there has been no representation. We are of the view that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity to substantiate its case before the ld. AO. It is also noticed that the ld. AR has specifically agreed that there would be no default on the part of assessee in de-novo setting aside assessment. In this situation the issue is restored to the file of AO for denovo assessment after granting the assessee adequate opportunity to substantiate its case.
There may be situations where the clients of banks may like to reduce the notional exposure of the hedging derivative contract. In such cases, banks may partially or fully terminate the contract before maturity, at their discretion, thereby reducing the notional exposure of the contract. This reduction in notional exposure would not be treated as re-structuring of the derivative contract provided all other parameters of the original contract remain unchanged.
3. At present, minimum Median Quarter Sigma Order Size (MQSOS) requirement for a stock to be eligible for introduction in derivatives segment is 5 Lakh. It has been decided to revise this minimum MQSOS requirement to 10 Lakh. Thus, in Para ‘3.1.2.b’ of the master circular, for the letters and figures Rs. 5 Lakh (Rupees Five Lakh), the following letters and figures shall be substituted, namely 10 Lakh.
In the instant case, it is found that the eligible new asset was not purchased within one year before the date on which the transfer of the original asset took place. Thus, the amount which is not utilized by the assessee for the purchase of new asset before the date of furnishing the return of income under section 139 was required to be deposited as per the provisions of sub-section (4) for availing deduction under section 54F in respect of those amounts also. In other words, as per the plain language employed in the above sub-section (4), only the amount which was actually utilized by the assessee for the purpose of purchase of the new residential house before the date of furnishing of the return of income under section 139 shall only be eligible for computation of deduction under section 54F(1).
. Given the fact that the assessee had not owned the property in her name only to the exclusion of anybody else including the husband, but in joint name with her husband, we agree with the submission of the learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee herein that unless and until there are materials to show that the assessee is the exclusive owner of the residential property, the harshness of the proviso cannot be applied to the facts herein. Apart from that, 50% ownership is with reference to the clinic situated in the ground floor. As such, the entire property is not an exclusive residential property. Hence, we are inclined to agree with the assessee’s contention that the joint ownership of the property would not stand in the way of claiming exemption under Section 54F.
A facility of E-Passbook to EPF Members has been devised by the IS Division, Head Office through Member Portal on EPFO website. The EPF Members can directly approach the EPFO website and after entering certain necessary details, they can get themselves registered. The registered EPF Members can obtain E-Passbook after entering Establishment Code/Extn. (if any) / Employee Number and Name as per PF slip.
Coming to the facts of the case, the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunities to furnish confirmations in respect of the impugned credits by the Assessing Officer (refer page 2 of the assessment order). A final show-cause notice was issued by him on 22/03/2006, stating the said fact, and by way of allowing a last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case, for 24/03/2006, and which (notice) again remained un-responded, even up to the date of passing of the assessment order, i.e., 29/03/2006 (refer page 3 of the assessment order).
NOTIFICATION NO 64/2012 – Customs, (N T), Dated: July 23, 2012 Central Board of Excise and Customs, hereby makes the following amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 83/2004-Customs (N.T.), dated the 30 th June, 2004, published in the Gazette of India, vide number G.S.R . 393 (E), dated the 30 th June, 2004, namely:-
