Enclosed is the list of minimum periodic compliances to be done by a Listed Entity pursuant to the provisions of the Companies Act and SEBI Regulations.
The result of the Chartered Accountants Intermediate (Integrated Professional Competence) Examination held in November, 2015 is likely to be declared on Monday, the 1st February, 2016 around 4.00 P.M. and the same as well as the merit list (candidates securing a minimum of 55% and above marks and upto the maximum of 50th Rank on all India basis will be available on the following website:
Karnataka High Court held In the case of M/s. Safina Hotels Private Limited vs. CIT & DCIT that it is clear that the notice is issued proposing to levy penalty under Section 271(1) (b) whereas the order is passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271(1) (c), which clearly indicates that there was no application of mind by the Assessing Officer while issuing the notice under Section 274.
In the case of Commissioner Of Central Excise, Delhi Vs M/S Bajaj Motors, it was held that the outdoor catering service provided has not been used for the personal use or consumption of the employee and the said service has been provided by the employer to its employees for preserving proper working atmosphere in the factory for enhancing the productivity.
Delhi High Court held In the case of Agson Global Pvt. Ltd. & Ors vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission & Ors that the powers and functions of an income tax authority which are to be exclusively exercised by the settlement commission must be in the context of and have a nexus with the settlement proceedings.
Delhi High Court held In the case of Principal CIT vs. Facor Power Ltd. that no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. This is so because, the Tribunal has correctly placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Indian Oil Panipat Power Consortium Limited [2009 315 ITR 255 (DEL).
Delhi High Court held In the case of M/s. Aggarwal And Modi Enterprises (Cinema Project) Co. Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT that whether a liability is ascertained or contingent is dependent on the facts of each case. Merely because a liability may be contractual or non-statutory would not make it incapable of being ascertained.
Delhi High Court held In the case of Principal CIT vs. M. Tech India Pvt. Ltd that in cases where the payments are made for purchase of software as a product, the consideration paid cannot be considered to be for use or the right to use the software.
Supreme Court held In the case of CIT vs. Bank of Nova Scotia that there is no substantial question of law, the facts and law having properly and correctly been assessed and approached by the CIT (A) as well as by the ITAT that for levy of penalty u/s 271C
The Finance Act 1995 has introduced a new chapter XIV-B in the IT Act with a view to providing a special procedure for assessment of search cases with effect from 1.7.1995. As per the Memorandum explaining the provisions of the Finance Bill 1995, in the old Scheme; valuable time was lost in trying to relate […]
