In case of goods sold from exclusive single brand retail outlets or restaurants or stores, the fact that a good is sold from such a store ought to be a relevant fact in construing if the good is its branded good or not. In the case of such goods, perhaps a rebuttable presumption arises in favour of such goods being branded goods of the specified store.
Stakeholders – this is to inform you that Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) would be completing the tenure of the contract as the BOOT (Build Own Operate & Transfer) Operator for MCA21 on 16th January 2013. From 17th January 2013 Infosys Technologies Limited (Infosys) would be taking over as the BOOT Operator. MCA21 will continue to provide services to the satisfaction of all stake-holders.
We are a practicing CA firm. We are operating from one rented premises, which belongs to Wife of one of the partner? The Partner’s wife recently raised the bill for rent of 9 months i.e. from 1st April 2012 to 31st December 2012 as one bill on 31.12.2012. No Payment towards the rent been made till 31st December 2012. Now the firm wants to take the credit of Service tax on Rent against its service tax liability for the quarter ending on 31.12.2012. Please suggest.
The Bonds are issued in the form of tax-free, secured, redeemable, non-convertible bonds and the interest on the Bonds will not form part of the total income as per provisions u/s. 10 (15) (iv) (h) of I.T. Act, 1961
In the instant case, after the search was conducted on 23rd February 2006, it was found that for the assessment year 1995-96, the respondent-assessee had not filed its return of income by the due date. It is only when block assessment proceedings were initiated by the assessing officer, that the assessee filed its return for the said assessment year on 11th July, 1996 under Section 158BC of the Act, showing its total income as Rs.7,02,768/-.
In the present case, the interest accrues on the surplus deposited by the club like in the case of any other deposit made by an account holder with the bank. For a receipt to be exempt on the principles of Mutuality, three conditions have to be satisfied.
Moto Vehicle Act mandates that during the period of lease, the vehicle be registered, in the certificate of registration, in the name of the lessee and, on conclusion of the lease period, the vehicle be registered in the name of lessor as owner.
However, in an appropriate case, although the petitioner might have moved a Court in his private interest and for redressal of the personal grievances, the Court in furtherance of the public interest may treat it necessary to enquire into the state of affairs of the subject of litigation in the interest of justice.
In the present case, the assessee had no right to transfer or alienate the machinery in any form, was obliged to re-deliver the equipment upon termination of lease agreement, was not to part with possession and not to make alteration in the equipments with the stipulation that additions would belong to the lessor; and the lessor was entitled to claim depreciation during the lease period. Looking to the explicit terms and stipulations, the findings of the AO about so-called “substantial” transfer of ownership though “apparent” non-transfer of title, in our view, could not have been countenanced and have rightly been reversed by the Appellate Authority.
With reference to above, the dealers who are required to file audit report u/s 61 of MVAT Act, 2002 for the financial year 2011-2012, besides filing the audit report, should also furnish following documents. i. A statement of submission of Audit Report in the format given in the circular 27 T of 2009
