Follow Us:

Public Notice No. 112 (RE-2008)/2004-09, Dated: 08.12.2008

December 8, 2008 283 Views 0 comment Print

A copy of Certificate of Physical Verification from the DCF/DFO of the concerned Division. The Physical Verification Report must be duly supported/mentionedwith the transit permit. The unexported materials against the licence obtained but lying in premises/godowns of the firm must also be inspected at that time and must be duly reflected in the Physical Verification Report.

Clarification regarding Service Tax Refund

December 8, 2008 418 Views 0 comment Print

Attention is invited to the Policy Circular No. 1 dated 11.4.08 on the above subject wherein in clause 2(c) of the said Circular, it was stated that “Clearing and Forwarding (C&F) Agency Service is not leviable to Service Tax”. Department of Revenue have now issued TRU Notification No. 33 dated 7.12.2008 allowing refund of Service Tax paid on the services provided by a Clearing and Forwarding Agent in relation to Export Goods.

Validity of assessment order for want of service of notice u/s 143(2)

December 8, 2008 649 Views 0 comment Print

ITO VS. VARIA PRATIK (ITAT A’BAD) Though s. 292BB comes into force on 1.4.2008 and not from any particular assessment year, it is declaratory, procedural and curative in nature and accordingly the validity of notices issued/served will have to be decided after 31.3.2008 in accordance with the provisions of section 292BB irrespective of the assessment year involved;

Validity of order passed by ITAT after 4 months delay and without recording reasons

December 8, 2008 673 Views 0 comment Print

SHIVSAGAR VEG VS. ACIT It is incumbent upon the Tribunal, being the final authority of facts, to appreciate the evidence, consider the reasons of the authorities below and assign its own reasons as to why it disagrees with the reasons and findings of the lower authorities. The Tribunal cannot brush aside the reasons or findings recorded by the lower authorities. It must give reasons and its failure to do so renders its’ order unsustainable

Appliability of TDS provision on a transaction between two foreign companies

December 8, 2008 711 Views 0 comment Print

It is settled law that a writ cannot be entertained against a mere show-cause notice unless the Court is satisfied that the show cause notice was totally non est in the eye of law for absolute want of jurisdiction of the authority to even investigate into facts. The assessee has not been able to demonstrate absolute want of jurisdiction in the AO.

Notification No. 70 (RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: 08.12.2008

December 8, 2008 547 Views 0 comment Print

This Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2004-2009 (RE-2008), incorporating provisions relating to export and import of goods and services, shall come into force with effect from 1st April, 2008 and shall remain in force ‘till further amendments’ unless otherwise specified.

Allowability of Deduction U/s. 42 of Income Tax Act for Determining Book Profit u/s. 115JA

December 8, 2008 8622 Views 0 comment Print

Gujarat State Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. JCIT The deduction claimed by the assessee under section 42 cannot be considered for the purpose of computing the deemed income under section 115JA

Onus Is On Assessee To Prove That The Net Realizable Value Whatever Has Been Shown By Him Is The Correct Net Realizable Value

December 8, 2008 1748 Views 0 comment Print

Valuing the closing stock at net realizable value method is duly recognized by AS-2 issued by the ICAI but, the onus is on the assessee to prove that the net realizable value whatever has been shown by him is the correct net realizable value and is less than the cost: the assessee has to satisfy the Assessing Officer by adducing the evidence that the net realizable value is less than the cost. D. Subhashchandra & Co. v. ACIT

Applicable Period Of Limitation In Case Falling Under Section 275 (1)(C) Of It Act

December 8, 2008 11078 Views 0 comment Print

The period of limitation during which an order imposing a penalty can be passed in the case falling under section 275 (1)(c) would be a period of six months beginning from the end of the month in which the action for imposition of pending was initiated. The period of limitation during which an order imposing a penalty can be passed in the case falling under section 275 (1)(c) would be a period of six months beginning from the end of the month in which the action for imposition of pending was initiated.

Perquisite Value of Rent Free Accommodation

December 8, 2008 7927 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT v Makote Hoshizaki The perquisite value of rent free accommodation as per Rule 3 of Income-tax Rules, 1962 will be 20 per cent and not 10 per cent of the salary as reduced by the rent, if any, actually paid by the employer or the actual rent paid by the employer in case the premises are not owned by the employer whichever is lower.

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031