In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 (Mah. IX of 2005), the Government of Maharashtra hereby amend the SCHEDULE A appended to the said Act, as follows, namely.
If the assessee had not bargained for interest, or had not collected interest, we fail to see how the income-tax authorities can fix a notional interest as due, or collected by the assessee. Our attention has not been invited to any provision of the Income-tax Act empowering the income-tax authorities to include in the income interest which was not due or not collected
In pursuance of sub-rule (1) of rule 11 of the Customs Tariff (Identification and Assessment of Safeguard Duty) Rules, 1997, the Central Government hereby extends the period upto 21st March, 2014 for
The Income Tax Department will now accept Aadhaar Card as proof of identity and address for issuance of Permanent Account Number (PAN). The Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued NOTIFICATION NO. 96/2013 Dated: December 23, 2013 expanding the list of documents admissible as proof of identity and address by including Aadhaar Card.
The Central Bureau of Investigation has arrested a Sanjeev Ghei, Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range – 2, Thane (Maharashtra) for demanding & accepting a bribe of Rs.3.5 Lakh.
Assessment proceedings under section 153A of the Act are invalid as no panchnamas were drawn in the names of 22 petitioners. Another aspect of the said contention relating to validity of proceedings under Section 153A of the Act has been also raised.
Contribution to be made to the provident fund must be the proportionate amount of salary paid to the employees. Salary was a fixed monthly payment whereas the commission was not a fixed payment and could not be included within the scope and ambit of the term salary .
Bonus cannot be regarded as falling within the scope of the expression salary as defined in Clause (h) of Rule 2. Clauses (b) and (c) of Rule 4 contain a clear indication that the expression salary takes in only periodical payments made by the employer to the employee during a year by way of remuneration.
Being a resident of Korea, appellant is governed by the Income-tax Laws applicable to the class of assessees as that of the appellant as prevalent in Korea. Therefore, it has a tax identity in Korea. In addition thereto, appellant has submitted to the jurisdiction of Indian Taxing Authorities by furnishing return of income and, thereby, acknowledged that it has also a tax identity in India.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee claimed credit for TDS of Rs.1,73,52,062/- for the AY 2006-07 and Rs.2,25,09,037/- in AY 2007- 08 which was not allowed by the AO on the ground that the income in respect of the said TDS was not shown by the assessee in view of the provisions
