The Reserve Bank has been receiving enquiries about the applicability of the aforesaid directions on investment by FPIs in security receipts (SRs) issued by the Asset Reconstruction Companies (ARCs). It is clarified that the restriction on investments with less than three years residual maturity shall not be applicable to investment by FPIs in SRs issued by ARCs. However, investment in SRs shall be within the overall limit prescribed for corporate debt from time to time.
As you are aware, guidelines on ‘concurrent audit system in commercial banks’ were issued by us vide our circular DOS.No.BC.16/08.91.021/96 dated August 14, 1996 setting out the scope and coverage of concurrent audit system in commercial banks.
It has been decided to permit AD banks to factor the export receivables on a non-recourse basis, so as to enable the exporters to improve their cash flow and meet their working capital requirements subject to conditions as under: AD banks may take their own business decision to enter into export factoring arrangement on non-recourse basis. They should ensure that their client is not over financed. Accordingly, they may determine the working capital requirement of their clients taking into account the value of the invoices purchased for factoring. The invoices purchased should represent genuine trade invoices.
take necessary steps to put in place systems for implementation of the circular, including necessary amendments to the relevant bye-laws, rules and regulations, within one month from the date of this circular
In the cited case, Delhi High Court held that the building had been developed to be sold or let out with no possibility of the terrace floor being subjected to such utilization. As there is no other purpose to be served by the property held on the terrace floor
Introduction: This article has been written to give you clarity on the implication of DVAT (2nd Amendment) Bill, 2015 which was introduced in the Delhi Legislative Assembly on 29th day of June 2015 and after discussion on the floor of the house was passed on 30th day of June 2015 with voice vote. One more […]
ICAI today announced the following results 1) Chartered Accountants Final Examination held in May, 2015. 2) Common Proficiency Test held on June 13, 2015.
Introduction of composite caps for simplification of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policy to attract foreign investments The Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, has given its approval to review the existing FDI policy on various sectors provided in the Consolidated FDI Policy Circular 2014, as amended by the Consolidated FDI Policy […]
There has been controversy from long about the limits on tax planning. The Supreme Court judgment in the case of Mc Dowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC) had marked dividing line between the tax evasion and avoidance of tax through tax-planning. In this case hon’ble Supreme Court held that tax planning may be legitimate provided it is within the framework of law. Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning and it is wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that it is honourable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods. It is the obligation of every citizen to pay the taxes honestly without resorting to subterfuges.
The Supreme Court in CCIT vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd. (2002) 20 SITC 172 (SC) has laid down that the resort to section 41(1) can be taken only if the liability of the assessee can be said to have ceased finally and there is no possibility or reviving it. Also, it has held that an unilateral action on the part of the assessee by way of writing-off the liability in its accounts does not necessarily mean that the liability ceased in the eye of law.
