In the case of Ashika Stock Broking Ltd. (supra) it was held that once there was a net surplus from share dealing of market segment and future and option segments together and if there was a net profit therefrom the assessee was entitled for rebate of entire STT. In the case under consideration surplus from share dealing from market segment/ future and option segment is not there, but there is net income after setting off of losses.
Company Secretaries Examinations June, 2012 Result Would Be Declared On 25th August, 2012 At 11.00 A.M. The Results Alongwith Individual Candidate’s Subjectwise Break-Up of Marks Will Be Available on the Institute’s Website, www.icsi.edu
Birla, a chartered accountant and an MBA himself, is not happy over the rate of pass percentage of CAs. The pass percentage during our time was 4 per cent. Now it is 17 per cent. The pass ratio should be 10 per cent,” he said, emphasising on the need for better products.
Tribunal were correct in taking the view that the refund was liable to be paid to the present respondents as service tax was not passed on to the buyers/customers and there was no unjust enrichment.
It is now settled law that in order to sustain a penalty under section 271(1)(c) the department must establish that the receipt of the amount in dispute constitutes income of the assessee and part from the falsity of the explanation given by the assessee, the department must have before it cogent material or evidence from which it can be inferred that the assessee has consciously concealed the particulars of his income or has deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars in respect of such income.
The post of Indirect Tax Ombudsman has been created with the objective of enabling resolution of complaints relating to grievances against Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Department and facilitating settlement of such complaints with satisfaction of the complainant. Para 10 (III) of ‘the Guidelines’ explains as to who can come up with complaint or grievance to the Ombudsman.
In terms of Regulation 15(iii) of the Notification ibid,an Indian Party is required to submit to the Reserve Bank through the Authorised Dealer every year within 60 days from the date of expiry of the statutory period as specified by the respective laws of the host country for finalization of the audited accounts of the Joint Venture (JV) /Wholly Owned Subsidiary (WOS) outside India or such further period as may be allowed by the Reserve Bank, an Annual Performance Report (APR) in Form ODI Part III in respect of each JV or WOS outside India set up or acquired by the Indian Party. Further, an Indian party is allowed to undertake overseas direct investments under the General Permission (Automatic Route) subject to compliance to the provisions under Regulation 6 (and Regulation 7, if applicable) of the Notification.Regulation 6(2)(iv) of the Notification requires that the Indian Party has submitted the APR in respect of all its overseas investments in the format given in Part III of the Form ODI.
Excise and Taxation Department, Punjab has made it mandatory to furnish information regarding intra-state movement of goods (within Punjab) by all persons making sales of Rs. 3 Lakh or above in a single transaction except in the case of Iron and Steel where this threshold shall be Rs. 2 Lakh instead of Rs. 3 Lakh and above.
The Tribunal was justified in recording the aforesaid findings. In the facts of the case, it was not possible to ascribe any wilful suppression or mis-statement on the part of the assessee for not paying excise duty because during the period in question, various decisions of the Tribunal were to the effect that the activity of cutting, bending, bunching of plates or channels in which the assessee was engaged, did not amount to manufacturing activity. In Continental Foundation Jt. Venture v. CCE 2007 (216) ELT 177 (SC), Apex Court observed that when there was bona fide doubt as to non-excisability of the goods due to divergent views of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the extended period of 5 years cannot be invoked. Mere failure or negligence in not taking license or not paying duty, is not sufficient for invoking extended period.
In order to prevent unhealthy practices surrounding securitization viz; origination of loans for the sole purpose of securitization and in order to align the interest of the originator with that of the investors and with a view to redistribute credit risk to a wide spectrum of investors, it was felt necessary that originators should retain a portion of each securitization originated and ensure more effective screening of loans
