Carrying on business activities entails many issues one of which is parties entering into various contracts which lay down the terms and conditions. Although, generally, efforts are made for unhindered implementation of the contracts, it may so happen that, in their performance, disputes could arise which the existing stipulations could not have taken into account.
Companies (i.e Public and Private) are required to file various resolutions and agreement in e-form MGT-14 with RoC under the Companies Act 2013. Provisions are as under:- Section 117(Resolutions & Agreement to be file) of the Act; Section 179(3) (Powers of the Board) read with rule 8 of the Act and Under various other Sections and Rules of the Act.
The Hon’ble CESTAT, Delhi accepted the contentions of the Appellant and held that in the absence of any such dispute regarding availment of Impugned Services and their utilization for payment of Service tax or proper accounting of the same
Section 194A (3) (b) Imposes duty on a co-operative society engaged in banking to deduct TDS where amount exceeds Rs. 10,000/-, whereas section 194A (3) (v) grants specific exemption to cooperative societies where payment made by it to members or to another co-operative society.
It is a general presumption that, expenditure in acquisition of assets is a capital expenditure there by not eligible for deduction u/s 37 (1) of the IT Act (However depreciation is allowed as per IT Rules) The honorable CIT (A) failed to note the difference in the nature of the soft-wares as dealt in Maruti Udyog Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax
The decision of the case is based on the verdict by Apex Court of India in the case of TRF Limited Vs CIT, [323 ITR 397 (SC)] Where Honorable Court has held that, it is not necessary for the assessee to establish that the debt, in fact, has become irrecoverable.
If the investments are not made from borrowed funds, then there should not be any disallowance. Since in this case it was evidenced from the records and evidence s that the income accured was from internal accruals consequently addition deleted
The first arguments which has been considered was regarding the source of advances in the 100% subsidiary comapy, which the assessee company argued to be out of reservs and suplus, which could not be contradicted by the Revenue.
In the case of M/s.Karur K.C.P.Packagings Limited vs. The Commissioner of Customs, it was held by Madras High Court that that where any drawback payable to the claimant is not paid within a period of one month from the date of filing a claim for payment
The procedure for detection of counterfeit notes has been reviewed in consultation with the Government and it has been observed that certain modifications are required for bringing improvement in reporting of counterfeit notes and facilitating maintenance of records by banks. Accordingly, the changes in the instructions are advised as under:
