Section 91 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 allows credit for Federal & State taxes, the DTAA allows credit only for Federal taxes. The result is that the Section 91 is more beneficial to the assessee & by virtue of Section 90(2) it must prevail over the DTAA. Though Section 91 applies only to a case where there is no DTAA, a literal interpretation will result in a situation where an assessee will be worse off as a result of the provisions of the DTAA which is not permissible under the Act. Section 91 must consequently be treated as general in application and must prevail where the DTAA is not more beneficial to the assessee. Accordingly, even an assessee covered by the scope of the DTAA will be eligible for credit of State taxes u/s 91 despite the DTAA not providing for the same.
Rajeev Sureshbhai Gajwani Vs. ACIT – Article 26(2) means that taxation of a PE of a USA resident shall not be less favorable than the taxation of a resident enterprise carrying on the same activities. The result is that the exemptions and deductions available to Indian enterprises would also be granted to the US enterprises if they are carrying on the same activities. As the assessee was carrying on the “same activities” of export of software as done by residents, it was entitled to s. 80HHE deduction as admissible to a resident assessee.
The export of cotton yarn (Tariff Codes 5205, 5206 & 5207) was allowed under licence. Now, issue of export licences for cotton yarn will be subject to a limit of 720 million Kgs during the fiscal year 2010-11 (i.e. upto 31.03.2011).
Suspecting the use of black money to finance deals in the country’s booming real estate sector, the Income Tax Department is keeping close tabs on the sources of funding for developers’ lucrative projects. “The focus of the Income Tax Department is real estate developers as the department has received many complaints of the involvement of black money in these deals. There is a large amount of money involved in the sale and purchase of land and huge income is generated,” a Finance Ministry source said.
All conditions in policy circular no 15 of 1st February 2011 will continue to apply, except the specification about dates and the calendar given in Annexure 2 thereof since the allocation is being made today (10th March 2011 and not on 10th February 2011). Special attention be paid to para 3(iv) & (v).
Government today sought to allay members’ apprehension in the Rajya Sabha that black listed NGOs could be getting funds from the Centre. “No blacklisted NGO can get grant-in-aid,” Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Mukul Wasnik said in Question Hour. He said that NGOs are given grant in aid only after recommendation of the state governments who are duly informed by ministries whenever any NGO is blacklisted.
The Union Budget 2011-2012 is likely to be more beneficial for the special and underdeveloped states, including J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Bihar, rating agency Fitch said on Wednesday.”The Union budget 2011-2012 is a credit positive for special-category states, who receive a larger share of their revenues from the central government. Underdeveloped states are benefited from higher allocation to Backward Region Grant Fund in FY12,” Fitch Ratings Director Devendra Kumar Pant said.
Company secretaries’ body ICSI today said it has signed an agreement with United Stock Exchange of India (USE) for exchange of information, consultation and co-operation. Under the memorandum of understanding (MoU), the two organisations will share research materials, publications, educational literature, demonstration material and information with each other, Institute of Company Secretaries of India (ICSI) said in a statement.
MAHRASHTRA ORDINANCE No.VII OF 2011,- Amendment of section 89 of Mah. IX of 2005. 3. In section 89 of the principal Act,— (i) for the words Certificate of Entitlement, wherever they occur, the words Certificate of Entitlement or, as the case may be, Identification Certificate shall be substituted ; (ii) after sub-section (2), the following sub-sections shall be added, namely:—(3) (a) An invoice issued by a Mega Unit holding a valid Identification Certificate granted to him by the Commissioner, shall, in respect of the goods other than declared goods covered by the Eligibility Certificate shall contain a declaration as prescribed under the rules made in this behalf.
The respondent raised certain claims against the appellant and invoked the arbitration agreement — the appointed Arbitrator adjusted Rs.11,10,662 awarded to the appellant, towards the sum of Rs.91,33,844 awarded in favour of the respondent and consequently directed the appellant to pay to the respondent, the balance of Rs.80,23,182 — the appellant paid the said amount to the respondent and filed a petition under section 11 of the Act praying for appointment of an arbitrator to decide its claim for the extra cost in getting the work completed through the alternative agency — the High Court dismissed the said application and held that the application under section 11 of the Act by the appellant was misconceived, barred by res judicata, and mala fide — appeal —
