AIFs shall undertake at least 10% of their total secondary market trades in Corporate Bonds by value in a month by placing/seeking quotes on the RFQ Platform.
Company contravened with the AS-18 read with Section 129 read with Schedule III of Companies Act, 2013 thereby affecting true and fair view of state of affairs of Company from financial year 2016-17 to 2020-21. Auditor failed to comment on the same in audit report for aforesaid financial years.
Jharkhand High Court upholds conviction and sentencing of Anosh Ekka in a case involving disproportionate assets and money laundering under PMLA.
Mumbai ITAT rules in favor of ACS, subscription charges not treated as royalty. Get insights into the decision.
Hrishikesh Mega Township (P) Limited Vs Income Tax Officer (ITAT Kolkata) In this case satisfied that the assessee has nothing to say in support of its alleged bogus share capital claim. Apart from the above, we also notice that impugned order was passed in 2016 by the ld. 1st Appellate Authority, whereas appeal has been […]
During the appellate proceedings, the assessee has submitted that it has taken loan for purchase of two residential properties which have been allotted to two Directors for their residential purposes. It was submitted that the perquisite value on account of residence has been accounted for in the income of the Directors and has been offered for taxation.
The LO does not constitute a fixed place through which business of assessee is carried out in India. Employees of the LO do not negotiate, finalise or discuss the mechanics of contracts including pricing with the assessee’s customers. As such the employees of LO merely act as a communication link between the assessee and the airline companies. The LO did not carry any activity, beyond that permitted by the RBI. The activities carried by the LO are thus, preparatory (auxiliary) in nature. The activities/operations of the assessee in connection with the contracts are carried from outside India.
The AO had made out a case that if the assessee company had paid dividend instead of remuneration to directors, such payment would have been fetched more tax. In our considered opinion, there is no question of changing the character of transaction from payment of salary to the possible payment of dividend, resulting into potential higher inflow of tax.
Pradeep Jain Vs State of U.P (Allahabad High Court) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that proceeding u/s 74 of CGST Act is still pending, he is cooperating with the investigation/enquiry and did not misuse the liberty of aforesaid interim anticipatory bail which was granted on 22.03.2021 by the Coordinate Bench of […]
Kajal Dutta Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Calcutta High Court) The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that garnishee proceedings have been initiated by the authorities by way of attachment of the appellant’s bank When the appeal was presented, the mandatory pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed tax has been complied with by […]
