Follow Us:

Notification No. 105/2008-Customs Duty, dated 18-09-2008

September 18, 2008 661 Views 0 comment Print

For the purposes of this notification, “rate of exchange” applicable for the purposes of calculation of such anti-dumping duty shall be the rate which is specified in the notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), issued from time to time, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 14 of the Customs Act 1962 (52 of 1962), and the relevant date for the determination of the rate of exchange shall be the date of presentation of the bill of entry under section 46 of the said Act.

Notification No. 40 (RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: 17.09.2008

September 17, 2008 346 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 5 read with Section 3(2) of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 (No.22 of 1992) and also read with Para 1.3 and Para 2.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2004-2009, the Central Government hereby makes, with immediate effect, the following amendments to Notification No.32 (RE-2008)/2004-2009, dated 19th August, 2008.

Public Notice No. 82 (RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: 17.09.2008

September 17, 2008 427 Views 0 comment Print

PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 82/(RE:2008)/2004-2009 In the statement of Standard Input Output Norms (SION) as contained in the Handbook of Procedures (Vol.2), 2004-2009, as amended from time to time, amendments/corrections at appropriate places as mentioned in ANNEXURE A to this Public Notice are made.

Sec 234A Interest cannot be levied on delayed ROI if SA tax is paid before due date

September 17, 2008 18279 Views 0 comment Print

Since the tax due had already been paid which was not less than the tax payable on the returned income which was accepted, the question of levy of interest Under Section 234A does not arise.

Notification No. 39 (RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: 16.09.2008

September 16, 2008 862 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 5 read with Section 3(2) of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992 (No.22 of 1992) and also read with Para 1.3 and Para 2.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2004-2009, the Central Government hereby makes amendments to Notification No.93(RE-2007)/2004-2009 dated 1st April, 2008 read with Notification No. 37 (RE-2008)/2004-09 dated 3rd September, 2008.

Amends notification No. 36/2001-Customs Duty (N.T.), dated, 3rd August 2001

September 16, 2008 394 Views 0 comment Print

The Principal notification was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide Notification No.36/2001 – Customs (N.T.), dated, the 3rd August, 2001 (S.O.748 (E), dated, the 3rd August, 2001) and was last amended vide Notification No. 104/2008-Customs (N.T.), dated, the 1st September, 2008 (S.O. 2144 (E) dated 1st September, 2008).

Public Notice No. 81 (RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: 16.09.2008

September 16, 2008 541 Views 0 comment Print

The goods for which the claim has been made are meant for utilization / production of goods/services of the EOU/EHTP/STP unit and will be utilized only in our factory and we shall not divert or dispose off the material procured without obtaining prior permission of the concerned Development Commissioner.

If notice U/s. 143(2) not served before due date then Assessment proceeding are not valid- (ITAT Delhi)

September 16, 2008 1439 Views 0 comment Print

Cebon India vs. ACIT (ITAT Delhi) Where the record did not show that the assessee had been served with a notice under section 143(2) before the due date HELD that the assessment proceedings were not valid as the non-service of the notice was a jurisdictional defect and not merely a procedural defect. Held also that s. 292BB was procedural and prospective.

Power of ITAT to rectify mistakes: Supreme Court

September 16, 2008 634 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT vs. Saurashtra Kutch SE (Supreme Court)- Where the Tribunal had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by holding that it was not entitled to exemption u/s 11 and subsequently, on an application filed by the assessee u/s 254(2), recalled the said order on the ground that it had not considered a judgement of the jurisdictional High Court and that there was a mistake apparent from the record and the question arose whether such recall was justified,

ITAT Spl Bench on s. 80HHC foreign exchange gain on Exchange Rate difference of Earlier Years

September 16, 2008 724 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT vs. Prakash I. Shah (i) The exchange rate gain difference pertaining to exports is an integral part of the exports and export turnover and cannot be treated as income from other sources. (ii) However, where such gain relates to exports made in an earlier year, the deduction u/s 80HHC is allowable only in the year in which the exports are made and not in the year of realisation of the gain.

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