Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Archive: 09 December 2015

Posts in 09 December 2015

SEBI Guideline on Outsourcing by Depositories

December 9, 2015 732 Views 0 comment Print

CIR/MRD/DP/19/2015 Core and critical activities of depositories shall not be outsourced. The core activities of the depositories shall include but not limited to the following: a. Processing of the applications for admission of Depository Participants (DPs), Issuers and Registrar & Transfer Agents (RTAs). b. Facilitating Issuers/RTAs to execute Corporate Actions. c. Allotting ISINs for securities.

SEBI: Review of Annual Custody / Issuer Charges

December 9, 2015 2820 Views 0 comment Print

SEBI vide circular No. MRD/DoP/SE/Dep/Cir-4/2005 dated January 28, 2005 has allowed the custody/issuer charges to be collected by the depositories from the issuers in the manner specified therein. Subsequently, the charges and the methodology were revised vide Circular Nos. MRD/DoP/SE/Dep/Cir-2/2009 dated February 10, 2009 and CIR/MRD/DP/05/201 1 dated April 24, 2011 respectively.

Compliance Calendar As Per SEBI Listing Regulations

December 9, 2015 3849 Views 0 comment Print

Compliance Calender As Per Sebi Listing Regulations S. N. Regulation No. Particular of Regulation Time Period of filing of Certificate COMMON OBLIGATIONS TO LISTED ENTITY 1. 7(3) Submission a Compliance Certificate to the Exchange Submission of Compliance Certificate to Stock Exchange certifying that all activities in relation to both physical and electronic share transfer facility […]

Labour Officer under Chhattisgarh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 has no jurisdiction to adjudicate rights of employee U/s. 30 (6) (b) of Act

December 9, 2015 1185 Views 0 comment Print

A conjoint reading of Sections 13, 15 and 17 of the Chhattisgarh Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 makes it amply clear that the powers of Inspectors under the said Act are not adjudicatory and the Inspectors are not authorized to undertake the exercise of adjudication of the disputes, particularly the disputes regarding application and interpretation of the Standing Orders

Penalty U/s. 271(1) (c) not attracted on addition U/s. 14A on debatable issue

December 9, 2015 8085 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Delhi held In the case of M/s. Mohair Investment and Trading Company (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT that it is clear that the present issue, related to application of section 14A, especially in relation to shares held as trading assets

MAT provision applicable on banking companies only prospectively w.e.f. AY 2013-14 onwards

December 9, 2015 5174 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Kolkata held In the case of UCO Bank vs. DCIT that Sec.115JB will be applicable only where the assessee is required to show profit & loss account in accordance with schedule VI of Companies Act. As the banks are required to prepare Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Account in accordance

No addition u/s 69 where investment along with its source recorded in seized documents

December 9, 2015 646 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Kolkata held In case of ACIT vs. M/s Prem Lal Jain that no addition could be made u/s 69 as the entire investments in shares made by the assessee have been duly recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee which are part of the seized documents

Disallowance of expenses where liability crystallized in the year but payment due later is not maintainable

December 9, 2015 5596 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Kolkata held In the case of ICI India Ltd. vs. DCIT that it is clear that liability towards leave encashment is a definite liability which has accrued and arisen during the year. However, payment of the same does not fall during the relevant previous year but under the mercantile system

Penalty u/s 271E may not be imposed where circumstances compels assessee to make repayment in cash

December 9, 2015 1172 Views 0 comment Print

ITAT Mumbai held In the case of Jayantilal Vaishnav HUF vs. JCIT that the reasonable cause u/s 273B need to be seen from the context of the situation where a person is reasonably and under bonafide belief of taking a action beyond his control i.e. cause which prevent a reasonable person in ordinary

Payment made to Independent Consultants is liable for deduction u/s 194J and not 192

December 9, 2015 4432 Views 1 comment Print

Appeal filed by Assessee – The Assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in running a Super Specialty Cardiac hospital. The assessee employs two types of Doctors, viz. Full time Consultants (herewith “FTCs)

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930