Assessee entered into transactions of payment of job work charges to a related party, viz., M/s Razormed Inc. during the financial year relevant to assessment year under consideration without obtaining prior approval of the Central Government in accordance with the provisions of section 297 of the Companies Act, 1956.
In the instant case, the transaction in question, was not cash transaction. It was merely book entries. The CIT(A) has called Remand Record from the AO, who vide report dated 05.01.1999, confirmed that the transaction in question, by mentioning that no cash was involved.
In the instant case, the following three dates are not in dispute. The residential house was transferred by the appellants and the sale deed had been registered on 24th September, 2004. The sale deed had been executed in pursuance of an agreement to sell which had been executed on 27th December, 2002
CIT v/s M/s Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. (BOmbay High Court)- Supreme Court has expressly held that the amendments to section 43B that were brought about by the Finance Act, 2003 are retrospective in nature, we find that the ITAT was fully justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,82,77,138/- on account of delayed payment of Provident Fund of employees’ contribution.
Understanding the availability of CENVAT Credit on freight outward up to place of removal for manufacturers in India.
Background One of the contentious issues while implementing corporate decisions is the validity of the resolutions passed under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (“1956 Act”) post implementation of the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 (“2013 Act”). First Phase of 98 sections of 2013 Act were notified on September 12, 2013. On February […]
The Ministry is leaving no stone unturned to leave matters pertaining to related party and transactions lucid. But is it so is the biggest question. On 24th July, 2014 MCA vide its Companies (Removal of Difficulties) Sixth Order, 2014 (Present Order) amended clause (iv) of Section 2(76) of Companies Act, 2013(Act, 2013). The Present Order is certain to create large amount of outcry among all the companies.
As per section 23 of the Companies Act, 2013 a private company may issue securities- i. by way of rights issue or bonus issue or ii. through private placement -In case of private company either it can issue shares to its existing shareholders by way of rights issue or by way of giving them bonus shares or it can issue securities through private placements.
Judgment of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Karnataka Bank Ltd. (supra), reliance on which was placed by Mr Mistry, squarely covers the issue raised in this Appeal. The facts in the case before the Karnataka High Court were that the Assessee was holding securities in different categories
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 | ||||
