Use the Data Validation + Countif function. It Prevents the user from entering Duplicate data. To do this: 1. Select a range of cells, for example, A2:A20. 2. On the Ribbon click <Data> à <Data Validation> 3. Select the [Settings] tab.
Circular No.154/5/2012 Notification No.4/2012 – Service Tax dated the 17th March 2012 has amended the Point of Taxation Rules 2011 w.e.f. 1st April 2012, inter- alia, amending Rule 7 which applied to individuals or proprietary firms or partnership firms providing taxable services referred to in sub-clauses (g), (p), (q), (s), (t), (u), (za) and (zzzzm) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994. Rule 7 determined the point of taxation in such cases as the date of receipt of payment. The provisions have been amended both in the Point of Taxation Rules 2011 and the Service Tax Rules 1994 such that from 1st April 2012 the payment of tax shall be allowed to be deferred till the receipt of payment upto a value of Rs 50 lakhs of taxable services. The facility has been granted to all individuals and partnership firms, irrespective of the description of service, whose turnover of taxable services is fifty lakh rupees or less in the previous financial year.
The deduction of Rs. 20000 under Section 80CCF for investment in infrastructure bonds was extended to A.Y. 2012-13 in last year budget to promote investment in infrastructure sector for its growth and development. But this time Mr. FM was silent on its continuance or otherwise. The lack of clarity on its scraping is a major concern. Views and expectations of Industry are mixed one, some expecting its continuance and some anticipating its scrapping. In my considered view the deduction shall likely be available next year also even though there is no announcement in the Budget in this regard. This view is further supported from the fact that Government has allowed Rs. 60000 Crore to be raised via tax-free infrastructure bonds this year.
Appellant is not simply a provider of output service but also a manufacturer of the excisable goods. The appellant contended that till 28-2-2008 for the manufacture of final products the service of Goods Transport Agency remained an output service and, therefore, Cenvat Credit was permissible to be utilized for payment of service tax upto 28-2-2008.
Explanation in Rule 6(1) does not make any provision as to which rate of tax will apply in situation like the one at hand (whether that on date of receipt of value or that on date of providing service). This explanation says that the service provider need to pay tax only on that portion of value for which service tax has been provided. In the instant case the Appellant paid tax on the full value received.
The CBDT has vide Order No. 60 of 2012 dated 28.3.2012 informed that the President has appointed several Income Tax Officers, presently posted in the region shown against their names, to officiate on regular basis in the grade of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) in the pay scale of Rs 15,600-39,100/- (Plus Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- in Pay Band-3) with immediate effect and until further orders.
Requirement of section 54EC to the effect that investment in specified assets is to be made within a period of six months from the date of transfer, was put to some clarification by the CBDT in Circular No 791 (supra). The question arose before the CBDT regarding exemption of a long term capital asset which had arisen on conversion of a capital asset into stock-in-trade.
Supreme Court has held that the provisions of the Special Court Act, wherever they are applicable shall prevail over the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The words wherever they are applicable are crucial. The Special Court Act makes no provision in regard to the determination of the liability to pay interest under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
From a bare reading of section 139 and 153A , it is evident that the provisions of section 271F are attracted when a person is required to furnish the return in accordance with section 139(1) or by provisos of that section. Section 153A starts with non-obstante clause and the purpose is only to specify separate time limit for filing the return. The only distinction in section 153A is that the AO is required to issue notice to the assessee requiring him to furnish the return within such period, as may be specified in notice, but otherwise the provisions of the Act have been made applicable accordingly, as if such return were a return required to be furnished u/s. 139. Therefore, all the consequences following for failure to file the return u/s.139 will follow u/s.153A also. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of ld CIT (A) to interfere and, accordingly, uphold the same.
The validity of the notice reopening the assessment under Section 148 has to be determined on the basis of the reasons which are disclosed to the assessee. Those reasons constitute the foundation of the action initiated by the Assessing Officer of reopening the assessment. Those reasons cannot be supplemented or improved upon subsequently.
