The SS-1, Secretarial Standard on meetings of the board of directors being effective from 01st July, 2015, were voluntarily adopted by big corporate as a good secretarial practices. But now SS-1 after coming into force made a big challenge for the private companies and unlisted public companies in the practice of preparation of notice of the board/committee meetings and its minutes thereon, along with attendance register and other records.
It operationalises the arrangements under the addendum dated 15.5.2012 added to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 23/10/2010 between India and Bangladesh through Border Haats at (i) Srinagar, Tripura – between Purbo Madhyagram (India) and Chhoighoria (Bangladesh); and (ii) between Kamalasagar, Tripura (India) and Tarapur Kasba (Bangladesh).
Definition of Subsidiary has been changed under Companies Act 2013 only for the Purpose of Compliance with Section 129(3) which requires a company to prepare and Present consolidated financial statement.
In the case of Venture Pvt.Ltd vs. DCIT, ITAT Mumbai has held that (1) the Net profit shown in the Profit and loss account should be adjusted with the items given in Notes to accounts, meaning thereby,
ITAT Kolkata held In the case of Sri Som Dutt v ACIT that whenever, the money has been received from overseas, then the onus is on the Assessee to prove that all the transactions are bonafide when he is claiming that the amount has been received as Capital Receipt.
ITAT Chandigarh held In the case of M/s Shree Dhanwantri Herbals vs. The ITO that the careful reading of the form 10CCB, in a serial order would clearly show that the assessee is required to inform the location of the Industry and column (c) specifically ask the assessee to state whether business is a new business
S.O. 2454(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause [A] of section 138 of the Finance Act, 2015 (20 of 2015), the Central Government hereby appoints the 9th day of September, 2015 as the date on which the provisions of clause [13] of the said section, sections 140,141, 142 and clause (ii) of section 143 of the said Act shall come into force.
History of problems in return utility:- In 2012-2013, the return utility (July-Sept) had the facility of inserting an additional row and mentioning that differential rate of tax; thereby showing the additional tax to be paid in a particular month for a particular service.
The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty, 128 ITR 294, held that no capital gains tax is payable by an assessee where it was not possible to compute the capital gains u/s.48 of the Act. It held that capital gains could not be computed in cases where the cost of acquisition could not be conceived at all.
CA V. Sundararajan A dealer is engaged in importing and selling fork lift. For selling of fork lift the dealer is collecting taxes @5% (Capital goods-commodity code no -2025). However the assessing officer is of the view that fork lift will fall under the category of motor vehicles-and are liable to tax @14.5% under the […]
