Follow Us:

Archive: 2013

Posts in 2013

Notification No. 36/2013-Customs, Dated: July 22, 2013

July 22, 2013 1832 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the

Lump sum amount received from ex-husband as alimony is not taxable

July 21, 2013 28335 Views 0 comment Print

In the present case, though the assessee was to receive monthly alimony which was to be taxable in the each year from conclusion of divorce agreement but in this case monthly payments were not received and, therefore, were not offered tax.

Tax Treaty Treatment of Termination Payments – OECD’s draft guidance

July 21, 2013 1251 Views 0 comment Print

This public discussion draft includes proposals for additions and changes to the Commentary on the OECD Model Tax Convention resulting from the work of that subgroup. These proposals have recently been presented to the Working Party for discussion with a view to their possible inclusion in the OECD Model Tax Convention.

TP- Making distinction between alcoholic beverages like ‘whisky’ and ‘other than whisky’, is undesirable for comparability under TNMM

July 21, 2013 6439 Views 0 comment Print

The arm’s length result under the TNMM is determined to the net profit margin of a comparable transactions under a comparable circumstances and the profitability derived from uncontrolled party engaged in similar business activity under similar circumstances are to be analysed.

S. 14A Interest expenditure cannot be disallowed by mechanically applying Provisions of Rule 8D

July 21, 2013 3106 Views 0 comment Print

Here in the present case, there is no linkage or nexus between the funds borrowed by assessee and the impugned investments, hence, no interest expenditure can be disallowed by mechanically applying the Provisions of Rule 8D of the Rules.

TDS not to be deducted on income not accrued to assessee

July 21, 2013 4474 Views 0 comment Print

it would be wholly unreasonable to deduct tax at source on an amount which has not accrued to the Petitioner as income during the financial year in question, the entitlement of the Petitioner being contingent on the outcome of the challenge to the arbitral award.

A brief on Input Tax Credit of VAT

July 21, 2013 378930 Views 105 comments Print

Article deal with 1. Non availability of credit in case of inter-state purchases and in certain other cases 2. When dealer is not entitled to input credit? Manufacturer will be entitled to credit of tax paid on inputs used by him in manufacture. A trader (dealer) will be entitled to get credit of tax on goods which he has purchased for re-sale.

Result Orientation and Objectivity by Monetary Limits for Various Proceedings in Tax Matters

July 21, 2013 1225 Views 0 comment Print

Acceptance of return is general approach of government: It can be said that acceptance of returns filed by assessee is general approach of the GOI. This is evident from the fact that majority of returns are accepted as per self assessment and they get finality once an intimation is prepared and accordingly tax is demanded or refund is issued.

Deduction u/s 80-IB(10) can’t be denied merely because Assessee uses “Project completion method”

July 20, 2013 2687 Views 0 comment Print

AO denied deduction u/s 80-IB(10) only on the ground that assessee engaged in business of construction had adopted ‘Project completion method’ instead of ‘Percentage completion method’ as prescribed under AS-7 (Revised). The Hon’ble High Court observed that there was no allegation to the effect that on account of “Project completion method” adopted by the assessee, its profit for any particular year was distorted. Further, the assessee had followed the same system consistently for a long period of time. It was thus held that assessee must be allowed deduction u/s 80-IB(10).

Deduction can be claimed in respect of a crystallized liability

July 20, 2013 8021 Views 0 comment Print

Though the questions are multiple, issue is single, namely, the deduction of Rs.61,08,500/- claimed by the assessee towards expenditure being part of development charges. The assessee had paid such sum to Surat Municipal Corporation towards water connection charges.

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930