Sumit Aggarwal STEP WISE FORMALITIES FOR FORMATION OF A NEW LLP Persons desirous of forming a Limited Liability Partnership Firm must adhere to the step by step procedure as discussed below: 1. Requirement of Partners 2. Apply for Designated Partner Identification Number (DPIN) and Digital Signatures, if does not have; 3. Selection of name for […]
Selection of name for the proposed company: The Promoters have to provide at least 6 names in the order of their preference/priority. The promoters can themselves search for the available names by visiting the MCA website.
AD Category -I banks were required to furnish information on the number of applications received and the total amount remitted under the Liberalised Remittance Scheme (the Scheme), on a monthly basis
Provisions of requirement of Tax Residency Certificate were introduced last year. The Finance Minister has attempted to make changes to the existing provisions. The author analyses the changes that are proposed and the possible effects.
The existing language of Section E (paragraphs 4.93 through 4.122) would be removed and replaced with the following language. The enumeration of paragraphs of Section F would be adapted accordingly.
These appeals have been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 24.3.2005 passed in Writ Appeal No .1452 & 1453/1998 by the High Court of Madras quashing the notifications issued by the appellant by which it has quashed the notifications dated 25.5.1987 and 13.1.1989 by which certain regulatory measures have been taken by the appellant against its members.
Chartered Accountant firms for selection of Concurrent Auditors of the branches/offices – Vijya Bank calls applications from Chartered Accountant firms for selection of Concurrent Auditors of the branches/offices for the period from 01.07.2013 to 30.06.2014.
It is contended by the learned counsel that the sum of Rs. 16 lakhs added by the Assessing Officer as undisclosed income has already been offered as income by the assessee by way of forfeiture of booking advance.
The undisputed facts are that the assessee was to receive the sum of 74,30,575/- from CCIL towards crane hire charges. However, actually, the assessee could receive only 58,39,011/-. The Revenue has not disputed the correctness of the assessee’s contention that it could not recover the sum of Rs. 16,66,081/-.
We find that a clear finding was given by the Assessing Officer in para 13.2 of the assessment order in the case of Shri Pranbhai S Fultaria that assessee has not filed any return of income though specifically required u/s. 142(1) of the Act and assessee has not maintained books of account. Ld. CIT(A) has not given a finding that this observation of the AO in para-13.2 of the assessment order is incorrect that assessee is not maintaining any books of account.
