Prior Permission of RA shall not be required for transfer or disposal of imported goods after a period of two years from the date of import. Transfer of Imported Firearms will not require permission from DGFT (a) after 10 years of import or (b) on attaining the age of 60 years by such importer.
PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 81 /(RE-2010)/2009-2014 In SION No. H-532, H-533, H-534 and H-535 of Plastic Product Group (Product Code H), the description of Import Item ‘Mineral Oil’ is amended to read as “Mineral Oil / Liquid Paraffin. There is no change in the description of Export Product and rest of the Import Items and the in the quantity of import items in above SIONs.
A reference is invited to paragraph 5 of our RPCD.CO.RCB.AML.BC. No.63/07.40.00/ 2010-11 dated April 26, 2011, wherein it was stipulated that when bank relies exclusively on the Aadhaar letter as complete KYC document for opening of an account, such an account would be subject to all conditions and limitations applicable to ‘Small accounts’ as detailed in the Government notification referred to above. After further consultations with Government, it has now been decided to accept the letter issued by the UIDAI as described above as an officially valid document for opening bank accounts without the limitations applicable to ‘Small accounts’ as prescribed in paragraph 5 of our circular under reference.
Notification No. 56/2011 – Income Tax Income Tax Department has released a New PAN application Form No. 49AA for Individuals not being a citizen of India, LLP registered outside India, Company registered outside India, Firm formed or registered outside India, Association of persons(Trusts) formed outside India, Association of persons (other than Trusts) or body of individuals or local authority or artificial juridical person formed or any other entity (by whatever name called) registered outside India. Download the new Form 49AA and instruction to File Form No. 49AA and Form no. 49AA.
Saif Ali Khan Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) -With regard to the deduction of Society charges, we find that it has also been disallowed by the AO on the ground that since a flat amount of 30% of annual value is allowed, no other deduction is allowable. However, we find that sec. 24(a) reads as under B
Vodafone Essar South Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ITAT Delhi I.T.A. No. 3238/Del/2009 A.Y. : 2004- 05 ORDER This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 30.3.2009 pertaining to assessment year 2004-05. 2. The grounds raised read as under:- “On the facts and […]
Navine Fluorine International Ltd. Vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahemdabad)- The assessee was engaged in the manufacture of fluorine and other refrigerant gases. During the survey operation under section 133A it was noticed that the assessee had received payments on account of sale of scrap. The assessee company had not collected tax (TCS) at the time of receipt […]
JCIT Vs M/s Videocon Industries (ITAT Mumbai) – It is seen on perusal of the assessment records of assessment year 1999-2000 that the loss on sale of shares on SMS Pharmaceuticals has been declared as long term capital loss. This shows that the transaction in respect of the purchase and sale of shares of SMS Pharmaceuticals are nothing but transfer of capital asset and not part of the business of the assessee company. This fact is evident from the assessment records of previous assessment years wherein the shares have been shown as investments. In view of the above, the claim of the assessee company that the said loss of Rs.95,00,000/- should be allowed as a business loss and thereby writing it off as bad debt under section 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act cannot be allowable as the conditions laid down by section 36(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not satisfied by the assessee company .
S K Bothra & Sons, HUF Vs ITO (Calcutta High Court) – When the assessee has discharged the initial burden to prove the loan transaction, the addition made by the AO based on the report of the Inspector without giving an opportunity to the assessee to explain the alleged information, is not correct.- In our view, equity and justice demand that the full text of the information given by the Inspector to the Assessing Officer which is the basis of the conclusion of the assessment should be made known to the assessee before the same is used against him so that the genuineness of the said information can be rebutted by the appellant-assessee or at least, the assessee can get an opportunity to explain the said information.
DCIT Vs M/s Toyoto Boshoku Automotive (I) Pvt Ltd. (ITAT Bangalore)- By virtue of Board Circular No.261 dt.8.8.79 and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank in 238 ITR 889, we find that it is a settled law that the date of presentation of the cheque should be treated as the date of payment of tax, inspite of the fact that some time was required for realization of the cheque. In the result, the appealfiled by the assessee is allowed’.8.1 In the instant case, admittedly, the cheques were presented and deposited before the authorized banker within the due date of payment of advance tax.
