Government’s road and highway building programme has enough cash to build the crucial infrastructure, Road Transport, Highway and Shipping Minister Mr Nitin Gadkari has said.
On February 12, 2017, ICAI elected its new torch-bearers CA. Nilesh Shivji Vikamsey as the President and CA. Naveen N.D.Gupta as the Vice-President for year 2017-18.
ANNOUNCEMENT Online Articles Placement Portal for selection of Articled Assistants by CA Firms The Board of Studies of the ICAI has been providing Optional Articles Placement Scheme for selection of Articled Assistants by CA Firms through its Articles Placement Portal. It provides a platform to the firms of Chartered Accountants having vacancies for Articled Assistants […]
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has been levied on the addition made by ld. Assessing Officer but when the basis i.e. quantum addition has itself been deleted by the Co-ordinate Bench,
Section 104 pertains to refund on mandatory pre-deposit made at first appellate authority and tribunal. This section states that where an amount deposited by the appellant under sub-section (6) of section 98 or under sub-section (9) of section 101 is required to be refunded consequent to any order of the First Appellate Authority or of the Appellate Tribunal, as the case may be
Ministry of Corporate Affairs to analyse the compliance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rules thereon wherein it was discussed that the members should take due care in enhancing compliance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013.
Regarding Empanelment of professionals having at least fifteen years of continuous as a Chartered Accountant with Regional Directors of the respective Region as Mediator or Conciliator for the year 2017-2018.
HC held that Though there is a provision to revise the returns filed under the KVAT Act, there is absolutely no provision where the auditor could file a revised report.
High Court held that that the disallowance of Rs. 70 lakhs paid by the assessee respondent as a condition pursuant to the order of this Court dated 01.02.2007 was liable as an expense as same was appropriated by the Customs authorities and it was covered by Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The petitioner’s contention is that the petitioner had detected the defects noticed by the Assessing Officer when audit was conducted of the accounts of the petitioner. It was in that context that the petitioner sent an e-mail, as per Ext.P4, for revision of return, which is said to be dated 29.08.2013. Admittedly, the petitioner did not pursue the application for revision and waited till three years, when a proposal for re-opening was issued under Section 25(1) of the Act dated 27.10.2016. A reply was filed at Ext.P3, in which a contention was taken with respect to the e-mail sent on 29.08.2013.
