To solicit the comments/views from public on suggestions pertaining to the third report submitted by Alternative Investment Policy Advisory Committee.
GST Department of states have started sending notices to dealers who have opted for GST Composition Scheme for failure to mention ‘Composition taxable person’ on every notice or Sign Board displayed at a prominent place of their principal place of business and at every additional place of their business.
Following is the Exposure Draft of Appendix C, Uncertainty over Income Tax Treatments of Ind AS 12, issued by the Accounting Standards Board of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, for comments.
In exercise of the powers conferred by sections 396, 398, 399, 403 and 404 read with sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 469 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Companies (Registration Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014, namely
This Act may be called the Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Amendment Act, 2017. (2) It shall be deemed to have come into force on the 2nd day of September, 2017.
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has clarified that there is no error In the results of CA Final examination held in November 2017 declared yesterday (17.01.2018).
The Special Judge, CBI Cases, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi has sentenced Smt. Savitri Singh, then Inspector, Income Tax, Survey Unit-I, Income Tax Department, New Delhi to undergo three years Simple Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5 lakh in a Disproportionate Assets case.
Initial burden was on assessee to show that transactions in loose sheet were not in the nature of undisclosed investments. As assessee failed to discharge the same, AO was justified in making addition under section 69.
Shri Keshav Lila Vs. ACIT (ITAT Indore) CBDT instructions which in our view provides a guideline to the search conducting team that no seizure should be made of the jewellery and ornaments found during the course of search proceedings u/s 132 of the Act, if the same have been duly declared in the wealth tax […]
Tribunal held that the beneficial shareholders of the lender company are partners of the assessee- firm and therefore the deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) has to be assessed only in the hands of the partners and not in the hands of the assessee- firm.
