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.
Notification No.93/2012 – Customs (N.T.) In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise & Customs hereby makes the following further amendments in the Notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 91/2012-CUSTOMS (N.T.) dated the 4th October, 2012 published in the Gazette Of India, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-Section (ii), Extraordinary vide number S. O. 2360(E) dated, the 4th October, 2012, namely:-
In other words, though the assessee had paid tax of Rs.50.00 lakhs, since the assesses was entitled to reimbursement of Rs.35.00 lakhs from the Company, the salary income (Rs.77.00 lakhs) received by the assesses had to be enhanced by Rs.35.00 lakhs only and not the balance Rs.15.00 lakhs which is paid by the assesses from the salary income. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the tax amounting to Rs.15.00 lakhs paid by the assessee from the salary income (not reimbursed by the company) could not be added to that income of the assessee. Accordingly the first question cannot be entertained.
Section 269UA(f) does not operate differently merely because the licencee under different agreements is the same. It is always open to a licensor and a licencee to enter into different agreements for different periods. There is nothing in the above provisions that warrants the periods under the various agreements being clubbed.
Vide Finance Act, 2012, certain retrospective amendments were made in Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), intended to clarify and restate the legislative intent of the source rule of taxation for non-residents in India. In particular, they addressed situations where transfers took place exclusively between such non-residents—hence indirectly—of underlying assets in India. The relevant section 9(1)(i) of the Act became effective retrospectively as of 01 April 1962.
Unfortunately, this court has failed to engage the respondents’ attention on such aspect of the matter despite several reminders in course of the hearing. Instead, the respondents have veered off course to emphasise on single-line orders of adjournment to impress that the settlement had never been worked out. But the settlement or the adequacy of the consideration for the transfer of shares is not germane to the issue.
NC Notification No. 94/2012-Income Tax Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), number S.O.698(E) dated the 3rd October, 1997, issued under sub-section (1) read with clause (b) of the Explanation to section 35AC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government had specified at serial number 1, “Development of land and construction of 1,00,000 houses
NC Notification No. 93/2012-Income Tax Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) number S.O. 1404(E) dated the 4th September, 2006, issued under clause (b) of the Explanation to section 35AC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government had notified at serial number 11, “Centre for Rehabilitation and Development, Chitrakoot, UP (for relief
NC Notification No. 92/2012-Income Tax Whereas by notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) number S.O. 2907(E) dated 17th November, 2009, issued under sub-section (1) read with clause (b) of the Explanation to section 35AC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government had notified at serial number 17, “Kawant livelihood project: the sustainable Development
NC Notification No. 91/2012-Income Tax Whereas by notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) number S.O. 2349 (E) dated 29th October, 2009, issued under sub-section (1) read with clause (b) of the Explanation to section 35AC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government had notified at serial number 4, “Expansion of the Chavara Cancer Hospital, Chavara Cancer
NC Notification No. 90/2012-Income Tax Whereas by notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) number S.O. 2907(E) dated 17th November, 2009, issued under sub-section (1) read with clause (b) of the Explanation to section 35AC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government had notified at serial number 19, “Mahatma Gandhi Hospital-Cardiac Hospital
