Circular No. 25/2012, dated 9-8-2012 The Ministry has received several representations from industry associations that para 6 of Accounting Standard-11 and para 4(e) of AS-16 are posing problems in proper implementation of para 46A of notification 914(E) dated 29-12-2011. In order to resolve the problems faced by industry, it is hereby clarified that para 6 of Accounting Standard-11 and para 4(e) of the Accounting Standard-16 shall not apply to a company which is applying clause 46A of Accounting Standard-11.
The Ministry of Labour and Employment has informed that there is no unclaimed fund lying with Employees’ Provident Fund Organization. However, there are certain accounts which are classified as Inoperative Accounts and all such accounts have a definite claimant. For the year 2011-12 an amount of Rs. 22,636.57 crore (provisional) is lying in Inoperative Accounts. The Government has not chalked out any policy to utilize this money. However, (i) In respect of unclaimed amount in insurance industry, IRDA has advised the insurers that unclaimed sum would not be appropriated/written back.
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has, revised its guideline on Priority Sector Lending (PSL) on 20.07.2012. The details of important changes in the activities included in the revised Priority Sector Lending guidelines are as under: • Overall target under priority sector is retained at 40 per cent. The targets for both direct and indirect agricultural lending are kept unchanged at 13.5 per cent and 4.5 per cent of Adjusted Net Bank Credit, respectively.
Notification No. 30/2012-Income Tax Central Government hereby notifies that all the provisions of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the States of Guernsey for the exchange of information with respect to taxes, as set out in the Annexure hereto, shall be given effect to in the Union of India with effect from the 11th June, 2012, that is, the date of entry into force of the said Agreement.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) announced the results of following examinations held in May, 2012 on August 7, 2012. Professional Competence Course (PCC) Integrated Professional Competence Course (IPCC) The toppers of Professional Competence Course (PCC) examination held in May, 2012 are from Delhi, Surat & Woollapalem (Andhra Pradesh). The details of the top three rank holders on all India basis for PCC along with the marks secured by them are mentioned at Annexure-A. The pass percentage of students in PCC is placed at Annexure-B.
A CA student who appears in one Group of CA IPCE Exams has to score Minimum 50% in Aggregate and 40 marks in each of the three paper. So in aggregate she has to score minimum 150 Marks out of total 300 marks to pass in examination. But recently we come across a case in which a CA student who appeared for May 2012 Examination whose result got declared on 07.08.2012 shown as pass despite scoring in aggregate less then 50% in one of the group She appeared. The student has scored only 133 out of 300 Marks but still shown as pass on CA Result portal http://www.caresults.nic.in . There seems to be some discrepancy in ICAI exam portal which ICAI needs to rectify to stop repeat of such occurrences in future.
The old flat had been sold on 7.3.2006 and therefore the assessee was required to construct a new residential house by 6.3.2009. The purpose of section 54 is to allow exemption to the assessee of long term capital gain arising from sale of residential house if the capital gain is invested in construction of new residential house within a period of three years from the date of transfer and, therefore, in case, the assessee had invested the capital gains in construction of a new residential house within a period of three years, this should be treated as sufficient compliance of the provisions.
It has now been decided that any increase in remuneration of Non-Whole Time Director(s) of a company solely on account of payment of service tax on commission payable to them by the company shall not require approval of Central Government under section 309 and 310 of the Companies Act even if it exceeds the limit 1% or 3% of the profit [u/s 309(4)] of the company, as the case may be, in the financial year 2012-13.
Supreme Court in Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 802 held that the additional liability equivalent to a discount represents revenue expenditure must, by analogy of reasoning, apply to the premium which is paid by the assessee at the time of redemption of the debentures. In that view of the matter, the actual premium paid upon the redemption of the debentures would have to be classified as revenue expenditure,
High Court of Madras in the case of CIT v. M/s. High Energy Batteries (India) Ltd. (supra), which in our view is distinguishable. In that case the Hon’ble Court held that the mere fact that the asset purchased had been leased back and vendor had undertaken to pay lease charges can not per se lead to the conclusion that the transaction is sham in the absence of any other material.
