State Governments Requested to issue Instructions to their Police for Vigorous Action under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 The Minister of Corporate Affairs has written to State Chief Ministers requesting State Governments to issue instructions to their State Police Authorities for vigorous action under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation […]
As it appears from the portion highlighted by us, the question involved in that matter regarding the validity of the State Laws included in the Ninth Schedule cannot have any application to the facts of the present case. Regarding constituent power under Article 368, we have already relied upon the observations of the nine-bench-judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of I.R. Coelho [dead] by L.Rs. v. State of T.N. (supra) holding that by addition of the words ‘constituent power’ in Article 368, the amending body, namely, Parliament does not become the original Constituent Assembly. We, thus, find that the above decision relied upon by Mr. Champaneri does not help his client in any way.
The prescribed standard of EPA & DHA content in Fish Body Oil (Refined) has been revised to ‘Not less than 5% by weight’ without any upper limit.
Presently, the bracketed portion at the end of Policy Condition 1 appended to Chapter 40 of ITC (HS) 2012, Schedule 1 (Import Policy) reads as under: [This policy condition applies to EXIM codes 4012 11 00, 4012 12 00, 4012 13 00, 4012 19 10, 4012 19 20, 4012 20 10, and 4012 20 90].
Import of items containing Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) has been restricted and non-ODS items have been made free. A revised list of countries which are parties to the Montreal Protocol under Appendix IV to Schedule 1 is notified.
As a last resort to redress grievances of Importers/Exporters, DGFT may provide an opportunity for Personal Hearing (PH). For such PH, a specific request has to be made to DG if following conditions are satisfied:
Insurance Sector has entered into the seventh year of effective AML/CFT regime. At this juncture, there is a felt need to capture certain information on AML/CFT matters on a regular basis.
It is noticed that the ancestral property was received by two brothers and the same was divided by two brothers by entering into an agreement between the two brothers. The assessee sold his share and shown the capital gain in the hands of HUF capacity. Whatever, the interest was received on sale consideration etc., the same was offered for taxation in his HUF capacity. The return was filed with the department, copy of the same is placed at page 70A along with computation of income as well as balance sheet. The same has been accepted by the department.
It is not in dispute that salary and wages accrue daily, weekly, fortnightly or monthly as per the contract of the employment. This is so as services is rendered in praesenti, the liability of the employer to compensate the employees for the services rendered also accrues in praesenti. A perusal of the Orders of the lower authorities show that what is actually in dispute is the quantification of compensation. As the assessee is a PSU, the pay revision depends upon the decision of the Government.
The law seems to be well settled that unless and until there is some other evidence to indicate that extra consideration had flowed in the transaction of purchase of property, the report of the DVO cannot form the basis of any addition on the part of the revenue. In the present case there is no evidence other than the report of the DVO and, therefore, the same cannot be relied upon for making an addition. In these circumstances, the question which has been framed is decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The appeal is dismissed.
