I have saved the xml file in my computer but while uploading system is giving the error “Cannot read the xml file? What should I do ? Ans. Kindly set the Internet Explorer Security Settings to Low as per following steps :a) In case of windows professional/vista, thenGo to Control Panel — Java — General —Settings Kindly uncheck the „Keep Temporary Files on my computer “and click the „Delete Files‟button and press OK. Close your existing browser and open a new browser.
CBEC has vide notification Notification No. 44/2012-ST, dated 7-8-2012 extended service tax exemption to ‘slaughtering of all animals service; earlier this was available only for ‘slaughtering service of bovine animals’. As per wiki dictionary Bovine animal includes domestic cattle (Cow) , bison, buffalo and yaks.
Under the new service tax regime, any services not mentioned in the negative list will be subjected to Service Tax, if not otherwise exempt. If services are provided against a portion of the salary foregone by the staff, then it will be considered as having been made for a consideration and thus liable to tax.
Trade Cir. 14T of 2012 he Hon. Bombay High court has delivered judgement in case of Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry (MCHI) vs. State of Maharashtra in respect of the writ petition no. 2022 of 2007. The constitutional validity of the amendment to section 2(24) of the Maharashtra value added tax Act, 2002, Notification dated 97-2010 notifying a composition scheme for Builders, Developers was upheld. The Promoters and Builders Association has filed special leave petition No. 17738 and 17709 of 2012 before the Hon’ Supreme Court of India. Hon’ Apex Court admitted the petition but no stay is granted to the judgement of Hon Bombay High Court.As a result, the developers are liable to pay tax under Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 with effect from 20th June, 2006.
The negative list of taxing services has hailed complexities in determination of the jurisdiction of the statute for taxation of services. The emphasis for taxing services is on the provision of services in the taxable territory. However, due to the inherent nature of service arrangements, it is not easy to determine the place where services have been provided. The components of a service transaction, being the place of performance, delivery and actual consumption could all be at different locations and pose challenges in determining the place of provision of service for determining the jurisdiction of the service tax law.
It is well settled by the judgment of the Supreme court in ITO v. Mohd. Kunhi, (1969) 71 ITR 815 that the Tribunal, while exercising its appellate powers under the Income Tax Act has also the power to ensure that the fruits of success are not rendered futile or nugatory and for this purpose it is empowered, to pass appropriate orders including orders of stay. In ITO v. Khalid Mehdi Khan, (1977) 110 ITR 79 the Andhra Pradesh High Court, applying the rule laid down in Mohd. Kunhi (supra), stayed the assessment proceedings pending before the Assessing Officer consequent to the directions of the CIT given in orders passed under Section 263 of the Act.
The condition precedent for making the reference by invoking the provisions of Section 142A thus is that there should be something on record to show that the assessee in first place has made such investment outside the books or the investment so made by him is not fully disclosed in the books of account and once this condition is satisfied, the quantum of such investment made can be ascertained by the Assessing Officer by making reference u/s 142A in order to make the addition u/s 69 or 69B, whichever is applicable.
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: –
