In a sign that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is strengthening its case against Kadapa MP and YSR Congress leader Y S Jaganmohan Reddy, the agency on Monday arrested Vijay Sai Reddy, auditor for Jagati Publication, which runs Sakshi newspaper and television channel. The arrest comes after a year-long investigations in the case that the son of former Andra Chief Minister Y S Rajasekar Reddy had amassed disproportionate wealth. The agency questioned Vijay Sai in its camp office of Dilkusha guest house on Monday morning before arresting him later in the day. Vijay has been accused no 2 in the case. His firm has been the auditor for YSR family for nearly three generations.
If in case you are using Digital Certificate issued post 1st January 2012 (SHA2 Certificate ),please ensure that you have Windows XP ( SP3 )/ Windows Vista/Windows 7 installed. All users using below mentioned services on MCA21 are required to download JDK 1.6 updated version 30 from the following link Click here to download
Please refer to paragraph 2 (b) of Circular DBOD.Leg.No.BC.104/09.07.007/2002-03 dated May 5, 2003 on ‘Guidelines on Fair Practices Code for Lenders’ wherein banks were advised to devise a system of giving acknowledgement for receipt of all loan applications. The banks were also advised vide our circular RPCD.SME & NFS.BC.No.102/06.04.01/2008-09 dated May 4, 2009 to put in place a Central Registration of loan applications and to use of same technology for online submission of loan applications as also for online tracking of loan applications as recommended by the Working Group on Rehabilitation of sick MSME Units (Chairman: Dr. K. C. Chakrabarty).
RPCD.CO.RCB.AML.BC.No 52/07.02.12/20Banks are advised to strictly follow the procedure laid down in the UAPA Order dated August 27, 2009 enclosed to our circular RPCD.CO.RF.AML. BC. No. 34/07.40.00/ 2009-10 dated October 29, 2009 and ensure meticulous compliance to the Order issued by the Government.
Notification No. 3/2012-Income Tax In exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (1B) of section 143 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), for the purpose of giving effect to the Centralised Processing of Returns Scheme, 2011 made under sub-section (IA) of section 143 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that, the following provisions of the Act relating to processing of returns shall not apply or shall apply with such exceptions, modifications and adaptations as specified hereunder, namely: –
Notification No. 2/2012-Income Tax This scheme shall be applicable in cases where return of income has been furnished in,- (i) electronic form; or (ii) paper form, in case of a class or classes of persons, as notified by the Board in this behalf. In case Form ITR-V furnished after the prescribed time is rejected on account of it being unsigned, illegible, mutilated, bad quality or not as per specification, it shall be deemed that the return in respect of which the Form ITR-V has been filed was never furnished and it shall be incumbent on the person to electronically file the return of income again followed by submission of the new Form ITR-V. Adjustment against outstanding tax demand.—The set-off of refund, if any, arising from the processing of a return, against tax remaining payable will be done by using the details of outstanding tax demand lying against the person as uploaded onto the system of the Centre by the Assessing Officer.
Airport Authority of India vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) – The Supreme Court has held in the case of Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT (1995) 25 ITR 34 that if the expenditure is made for acquiring or bringing into existence an asset or advantage for the enduring benefit of the business it is properly attributable to capital and is of the nature of capital expenditure If on the other hand it is made not for the purpose of bringing into existence any such asset or advantage but for running the business or working it with a view to produce the profits it is a revenue expenditure. If any such asset or advantage for the enduring benefit of the business s is thus acquired or brought into existence it would be immaterial whether the source of the payment was the capital or the income of the concern or whether the payment was made once and for all or was made periodically. The aim and object of the expenditure would determine the character of the expenditure whether it is a capital expenditure or a revenue expenditure.
Key features of File Validation Utility (FVU) version 3.3 FVU 3.3 will be applicable for quarterly TDS/TCS statements pertaining to FY 2010-11 onwards Mandatory to quote Book Identification Number – BIN (in case of regular statement) for tax deposited by book entry (transfer voucher – applicable only in case of Govt. deductors). BIN to contain details as below:
No Need to Carry Ticket Print-Out, Mere Display of Message on Mobile is Sufficient during Travel.To bring further convenience to the rail users, Indian Railways through Indian Railway Catering & Tourism Corporation (IRCTC), a Public Sector Undertaking under the Ministry of Railway, has been offering the service of booking e-ticket over the mobile phone.
Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) – Judgment of Special Bench in Aztec Software (supra) is not in conflict with Sony India (supra) once the validity of said instruction is upheld by this Court. The followup thereof is that the Assessing Officer was supposed to refer the matter to the TPO having regard to the fact that Specialized Cell was created by the Revenue Department to deal with the complicated and complex issues arising out of the transfer mechanism. The Tribunal was right in holding that even the instant case itself provides a good example for need to refer the matter to TPO in such cases. When circular is issued under Section 119 of the Act and its validity is upheld it is binding on the Assessing Officer. Not taking recourse thereto and passing the order amounted to making assessment without conducting proper inquiry and investigation as enjoyed by law which was also warranted in the facts of this case and, therefore, the Commissioner was right in holding that such assessment was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. (supra).
