While converting into Ind AS, the Companies are facing couple of practical issues in dealing with the requirements of Ind AS. There are lots of questions are still unanswered on practical aspects. Among the most common questions, one question is that – HOW TO ACCOUNT PRIOR PERIOD ERRORS?
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior permission in writing from the publisher.
GST is applicable within the taxable territory. In this article we will analyze a scenario where we could notice how GST law could extend its arm to cover transactions beyond the taxable territory.
There is a myth about section 24(iii) for compulsory registration in respect of a person who is required to pay tax under reverse charge as if an unregistered person purchases from unregistered persons above Rs. 5000 in a day, payment of legal fees and transportation which are covered under reverse charge. In these cases unregistered person is required to take registration due to section 24(iii).
In order to streamline the deficiencies, functioning and to pluck out money laundering in the area of Foreign Investment by Institutional Investors abroad, Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has come up with new regulation being SEBI (Foreign Portfolio Investors) Regulations, 2014
Are you planning to go abroad and become am NRI? Today you are a Resident Indian. Tomorrow you may become an NRI if your employer provides an opportunity. When an opportunity like this knocks at our door, are we ready to face the change? Are we prepared?
Assessment Order is without jurisdiction as the law laid down by the Apex Court in GKN Driveshafts (supra) has not been followed, then there is no reason to restore the issue to the Assessing Officer to pass a further/fresh order. If this is permitted, it would give a licence to the Assessing Officer to pass […]
The ITAT noted that document was silent as to payer and payee of amount in question nor does it disclose that payment was made by cheque or cash nor it is proved that document is in handwriting of assessee or at least bears his signatures.
The petitioner has challenged the action of the respondent in not permitting the petitioner to correct the error in mentioning the Permanent Account Number (PAN for short) of one of the agencies to whom the petitioner had made multiple payments during the relevant financial period for which deduction of tax at source was necessary.
The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than Rs.20 lakhs and as per the CBDT Circular No.21 of 2015 dated 10th December, 2015, the department has taken a policy decision not to prosecute the appeals wherein the tax effect is less than Rs.20 lakhs.
