It was held that what is covered u/s.44C is the expenditure that is common in nature meaning thereby that the benefit of the said expenditure is derived both by the Head Office and the Branch. It was held that payment of salary made in the case of the assessee was to expatriate employees who were working actually with the assessee in India though the payment was made to them by the Head Office outside India. It was held that the expenditure incurred on such payment thus was incurred exclusively for the branch in India and the same was not covered within the purview of sec.44C.
Trade Circular No. 13T of 2012 To give effect to the Budget proposals, a Bill (Legislative Assembly Bill No. XVII of 2012) to amend the Maharashtra Sugarcane Purchase Tax Act, 1962, the Maharashtra State Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employment Act, 1975, the Maharashtra Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into local Areas Act, 1987, the Maharashtra Tax on Luxury Act, 1987, the Maharashtra Tax on Entry of Goods into local Areas Act, 2002 and the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 was introduced in the Legislature. The said Bill has been passed by both the houses of the Legislature. The Act is now published in the Maharashtra Government Gazette dated 25th April 2012. (Mah. Act No. VIII of 2012).
Notification No. 38/2012-Customs (ADD) in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (5) of Section 9A of the said Act and in pursuance of rule 23 of the said rules, the Central Government hereby makes the following amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 89/2007-Customs, dated the 25th July, 2007, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 504 (E), dated the 25th July, 2007, namely: –
Data Inconsistency issues which need to be avoided for accurate processing. 1. Set off of brought forward loss claimed, but Schedules BFLA / CFL not filled ……. Year of loss not indicated in CFL. 2. Profit before tax (at serial No. 43 of Sch. P & L Account) differs from Profit from business at serial 1 of Sch. B P 3. Depreciation claimed in Sch. BP – but Sch. DEP / DPM / DOA not filled in / Depreciation debited in Sch. P & L Account not added back in Sl. 11 of Sch. BP. 4. Special benefit for female claimed – Gender in PAN database is Male.
[r 1] In this Article we have dealt with Question related to income Tax Refund i.e. 1) Necessary data necessities required in order to get the Refund through Cheque 2) Basic data required all the validations to get the Refund through ECS? 3) What should I do, if my Refund is failed due to change in my Communication Address? 4) Within how many days I will get my refund after updating the new address in the E-Portal? 5) What should I do, if my Refund is failed due to error in Ac number or Change in the Ac details? 6) Mandatory points to be noted while sending a Response Sheet.
In order to give an opportunity to the defaulting companies in the state of Jammu & Kashmir to enable them to make their default good by filing such belated documents and to become a regular compliant in future, the Ministry, in exercise of the powers under Section 611(2) and 637B (b) of the Companies Act, 1956 has decided to introduce a Special Scheme namely, Company Law Settlement Scheme (Jammu & Kashmir), 2012
The said chapter nowhere provides that method of accounting for the purpose of ascertaining net profit should be the only income from business alone and not from other sources. Section 29 provides how the income from profits and gains of business or profession should be computed and this has to be done as provided under Section 30 to 43D. By virtue of Section 5 of the said Act that total incomes of any previous years includes all income from whatever source derived. Thus for the purpose of Section 40(b)(v) read with Explanation there cannot be separate method of accounting for ascertaining net profit and/or book-profit.
Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the beneficial ownership of the shares vested with Copal Jersey and that ownership should determine the applicatory law. India did not have a treaty with Jersey and hence on the application of the Income-tax Act, the capital gains are taxable in India. He pointed out that there was no dispute that the gains were taxable under the Act.
[a] The first test is whether the initial acquisition of the subject matter of transaction was with the intention of dealing in the item, or with a view to finding an investment. If the transaction, since the inception, appears to be impressed with the character of a commercial transaction entered into with a view to earn profit, it would furnish a valuable guideline.
It can be observed from the earlier parts of the TPO’s order that he confined himself only to IT/ITES for the purposes of bench marking. In such a case, there could have been no question of the TPO embarking upon the figures in relation to non-IT/ITES segments of some of the comparable cases as chosen by him. Apart from making a general statement that the TPO also considered the figures from non-IT/ITES segments in some of the comparable cases, no material has been placed on record to substantiate this argument.
