Explanation of section 151(1) defines ‘small shareholder’ as a shareholder holding shares of nominal value of not more than twenty thousand. Here person elected by small shareholder as ‘director’ may or may not be a shareholder of a company but a person electing such ‘director’ shall be the ‘small shareholders’.
Companies Act, 2013 on financial reporting is being aligned to international practices and the introduction of Internal Financial Controls (IFC) in the Act is reflective of this trend. The Act has imposed specific responsibilities on the Board of Directors/ Audit Committee as well as on Independent Directors towards the company’s internal financial controls.
As per Rule 4A(1) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 every person providing a taxable service is required to issue an invoice or bill signed by such person or a person authorized by him in respect of taxable service provided or to be provided by him and such invoice or bill, as the case may be. […]
The more free the mind, the more we can cultivate good thoughts into being. But our minds are full of clutter. We worry more about what others are doing, whether it concerns us or not. We judge people. We conclude how a person is based on whatever we come to know about them.
With the strong intent of the government in bringing the nation’s most awaited tax reform to reality we can now believe that implementation of GST in very soon going to become reality. With Recent speech of FM in Singapore indicating that GST being a transactional tax even if deferred from 1st April, 2016 can be […]
Officers of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI), Chennai Zonal Unit, Chennai arrested the Director of a Limited Company based at Chennai providing Information Technology Software Service and Internet Communication Service, for collecting Service Tax of Rs.2.94 crores from 2010-2011 to 2014-2015 and not remitting the same to the Government Exchequer.
The Hon’ble Kerala HC in in the case of CIT vs. M/s P V S Memorial Hospital Ltd. held that deduction of TDS under a wrong section amounts to non-compliance with the provisions of Chapter XVII-B which results in applicability of section 40(a)(ia) where the payments get disallowed and action u/s 201(1).
In case of Kottinatu Transporters vs. CIT, The Hon’ble Kerala HC by disposing off write petition held that the tax deduction under a heading by payer, it cannot be determinative of character of income of payee.
The Hon’ble Kerala HC in the case of Thomas George Muthoot vs. CIT held that the second proviso to sec 40(a)(ia) is not curative by nature , the same is an additional remedy to provide non-disallowance in certain tax deduction default cases.
In a recent decision dated 22.09.2015, rendered in the case of Jyoti CNC Automation Ltd. v/s the State of Gujarat, the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal has held that C Form cannot be disallowed merely on the basis of data available on tinxsys [tax information exchange system] website without investigating the authenticity of the form.
