Though a total sum of Rs. 5 crores was placed by the State Government at the disposal of the assessee-company for allotment of shares, such sum was not utilized for the purpose for which the same was transferred. As per the understanding between the assessee and the State Government pending allocation of shares, whatever interest was earned, should be paid over to the State of Gujarat.
The short point involved in the present case is whether levy of interest under Section 234A/234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is mandatory or not. At one point of time there was a doubt on the nature of interest payable by the assessee under Section 234A/234B of the Act. That controversy stood finally settled by a Five-Judge Bench decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala and Others, [2001] 252 ITR 1.
Notification No. 52/2012-Customs New Delhi, the 13th September, 2012 G.S.R. (E).- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby makes the following further amendments in the […]
Notification No. 51 / 2012 – Customs Seeks to amend notification No.12/2012-Cus,dated 17.03.2012 to provide concessional rate of duty on Gold Findings and to extend the list of items under Sr. No.282
Notification No. 41/2012-Customs (ADD) Anti dumping duty on imports of Ductile iron Pipes, originating in, or exported from, China PR was imposed by Notification No. 103/2007-CUSTOMS, dated the 14th September, 2007 and would have expired on 13 September 2012. Now, the Government has extended it by another year till 12 September 2013.
Honorable ITAT held that It is not necessary that all categories of its business activities must start either simultaneously or the last stage must start before it can be said that the business was set up. Absence of flow of revenue irrelevant for deciding whether a business has been set up.
Neither Section 80HH nor Section 80I (as it then stood) statutorily obliged BRPL to maintain its accounts unit-wise and that it was open to BRPL to maintain its accounts in a consolidated form in order to put an end to the litigation between the Tax Department and the PSU we remit the case to the case to the AO
As per the proposed law that was pending for consideration of the President of India, scheme of amalgamation and/or arrangement would involve two per cent Stamp Duty whereas the ‘conveyance’ as of date would require payment of duty at the rate of seven per cent. It is for the State to fix the rate. So long the new law does not come in force the existing law would prevail.
The assessee was owner of the property standing in his name which was sold; qua capital gain exemption u/s 54f was claimed by the assessee as the sale proceeds of the property were utilized for purchasing another house in the name of assessee and his wife. Wife did not contribute any amount towards purchase. Thus new house was purchased by the assessee.
The respondent in this civil appeal is Ahmedabad Stamp Vendors Association and the Members of the said Association are licensed Stamp Vendors. We are satisfied that 0.50% to 4% discount given to the Stamp Vendors is for purchasing the stamps in bulk quantity and the said discount is in the nature of cash discount.
