The expression ‘reasonable cause’ used in Section 273B is not defined under the Act. Unlike the expression ‘sufficient cause’ used in Section 249(3), 253(5) and 260A(2A) of the Act, the legislature has used the expression ‘reasonable cause’ in Section 273B of the Act. A cause which is reasonable may not be a sufficient cause. Thus, the expression ‘reasonable cause’ would have wider connotation than the expression ‘sufficient cause’. Therefore, the expression ‘reasonable cause’ in Section 273B for non-imposition of penalty under Section 271E would have to be construed liberally depending upon the facts of each case.
Boskalis Dredging India P.Ltd, is a company incorporated in India on 5th January,1996. It is engaged in the business of undertaking inter alia capital and maintenance dredging projects and providing technical related services in dredging. However, during the relevant year, the income was earned from hire of personnel, hire of equipment and services rendered to group companies and not from dredging contracts. The assessee had leased dredger Gemini and Multicat Coby to associate enterprise, Boskalis International BV (‘BIBV’) since 1997, under the Standard Bareboat Charter Agreement.
In the said assessment year, the assessee had earned premium of Rs.12,26,140/- on sale of export quota. The Assessing Officer held that this premium is covered by Section 28 (iiia/b/c) and accordingly computed deduction under Section 80HHC but without giving benefit of provisos under sub Section (3) to Section 80HHC. He observed that the export turnover in the previous year was exceeding Rs.10 crores and the assessee had not complied with the several conditions mentioned in the provisos. The sale proceeds received from sale of quota rights were excluded from benefit under the provisos to Section 80HHC(3) as this was not the regular business income of the assessee.
The assessee has made an attempt to suppress the true colour of the payment towards the goodwill by stating that payments were made towards non compete fee, IPR on brand/brand value, etc. In fact the assessee as well as its sister concern M/s. Pentafour Technologies Limited do have a common CEO and the companies are working under a common management. There is interlacing of activities and interlocking of funds.
The impugned order passed by the Settlement Commission deserves to be upheld as the assessee, it is apparent, is caught in its own web, which it stoutly and strongly deny. Even now in the writ petition they have urged and argued that their conduct and actions were bona fide and solely guided by the noble and honourable desire to come clean with their inglorious past. The assessee claims that they without any motive or intention to help a third person, declared undisclosed taxable income of Rs. 1,36,08,897. It is being recorded that the undisclosed income has been partly accepted and immunity from penalty and prosecution stands granted, but the ‘wrong’ is checkmated and corrected by the Settlement Commission.
No Input Tax Credit claim shall be allowed unless the corresponding tax is paid by the selling dealer into the Government treasury. In the case of mismatch in the sales and purchases in electronic matching of annexure Jl and J2 of form 704, then to the extent of unmatched amount of tax, the ITC of the claimant dealer shall be denied.ITC claim shall not be allowed if the purchases are effected from hawala dealer and even though such hawala dealer has paid the taxes partially or fully as these are not genuine transactions.
At the interbank foreign exchange market, the rupee fell for the fourth-day in a row, tumbling 42 paise to a new record intra-day low of 56.57 against the US dollar. The rupee fell on increased capital outflows from the domestic equity markets, and rising dollar demand by importers, after the US central bank indicated weak growth prospects for the US economy
The Competition Commission of India has found cement manufacturers in violation of the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 which deals with anticompetitive agreements including Cartels. The order was passed pursuant to investigation carried out by the Director General upon information filed by Builders Association of India. The Commission has imposed penalty on 11 Cement Manufacturers named in the information @0.5 times of their profit for the year 2009-10 and 2010-11. The penalty amount so worked out amounts to more than Six thousand Crores. The Commission has also imposed penalty on the Cement Manufacturers Association.
Order No. 5/FT&TR/2012 In partial modification of Order No. 4/FT&TR/2012, and in exercise of powers conferred under section 144C of the income-tax Act, 1961, the Board hereby reconstitutes the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) comprising of three Commissioners of Income-tax/Directors of Income-tax as Members of DRP at the places given below, who shall perform such duties. In addition to their regular duties with immediate effect and until further order:
SEBI, is in the process of formulating the following:- a. Minimum listing standards:- SEBI shall separately prescribe minimum listing standards for listing of companies on stock exchanges. However, the stock exchanges can prescribe more stringent norms, if they so desire.
