Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Foreign Currency Accounts by Resident Individuals- FAQs

August 1, 2016 948 Views 0 comment Print

Sec 2(v) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) defines a person resident in India as: (i) a person residing in India for more than one hundred and eighty-two days during the course of the preceding financial year but does not include-

Cash credit account cannot be provisionally attached: Gujarat HC

June 27, 2016 3756 Views 0 comment Print

Kaneria Granito Ltd Vs ACIT (Gujarat High Court) In this case, admittedly, all the three bank accounts were in the nature of either the cash credit account or term loan account. In other words, the accounts were opened to enable the assessee to borrow the money from the bank for the purpose of its business. […]

Reopening invalid if no nexus with reasons recorded & ‘formation of belief’

May 13, 2016 1329 Views 0 comment Print

Smt. B. Radha & Ors. Vs. DCIT (ITAT Hyderabad) The impugned issue to be considered is whether the reopening of assessment on the basis of so-called statement of Shri Ramalinga Raju (Satyam Computers) is warranted. As seen from the additions made, there is no live-link with the reasons recorded and the additions made. In fact, […]

ITAT explains when an individual or a HUF can be treated as ‘not ordinarily resident’ in India

December 21, 2015 2413 Views 0 comment Print

It is evident from the word ‘or’, occurring for the first time in sub-clause (a) or (b) of clause (6) of section 6, that the two conditions contemplated in those sub-clauses are alternate and these are not cumulative. The fulfillment of either of the conditions would be sufficient to treat an individual or a Hindu undivided family as ‘not ordinarily resident’ in India.

Court/Tribunal can dismiss appeal for non-prosecution

November 6, 2015 1170 Views 0 comment Print

Where AO allowed interest on capital and remuneration paid to the partners from the estimated income on the basis of partnership deed, assessment made by AO on estimation of income could not be treated as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of Revenue for invoking the jurisdiction under section 263.

Relevant date for allowing benefit U/s. 54 /54F

October 12, 2015 1461 Views 0 comment Print

Shri Vembu Vaidyanathan Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) Left with the relevant date to decide in the facts of the case, the decision of the Tribunal in Purushottam Govind Bhat’;s case (supra) really comes to favour the assessee. In the said case, the assessee joined the society in 1977. He was allotted a flat and occupied […]

Savings Bank Deposit Account (BSBDA) – FAQs (RRBs/StCBs/DCCBs)

September 2, 2015 345 Views 0 comment Print

1. Query What is the definition of ‘Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account’ (BSBDA)? Response All the existing ‘No-frills’ accounts opened pursuant to guidelines issued vide circular RPCD.RF.BC.54/07.38.01/2005-06 dated December 13, 2005 and RPCD.CO.No.RRB.BC.58/ 03.05.33(F) / 2005-06 dated December 27, 2005 and converted into BSBDA in compliance with the guidelines issued in circular RPCD.CO.RRB.RCB.BC.No.24/07.38.01/2012-13 dated August 22, 2012 as well as fresh […]

No deduction U/s. Section 80IB(10) if completion certificate issued after cut off date

August 21, 2015 1903 Views 0 comment Print

CIT Vs M/s Global Reality (Madhya Pradesh High Court) The next question that needs to be answered, is, whether the stipulation in Section 80IB(10)(a) can be said to be directory. Considering the prodigious benefit offered in terms of Section 80IB to the assessee (hundred per cent of the profits derived in any previous year relevant […]

Master Circular on Customer Service in Banks

July 1, 2015 3957 Views 0 comment Print

Reserve Bank of India RBI/2015-16/59 DBR No.Leg.BC. 21/09.07.006/2015-16 July 1, 2015 Ashadha 10, 1937 All Scheduled Commercial Banks (Excluding RRBs) Dear Sir, Master Circular on Customer Service in Banks Please refer to the Master Circular DBOD No.Leg.BC.21/09.07.006/2014-15 dated July 01, 2014 consolidating the important instructions issued by us in the area of customer service up to June […]

Penalty imposed not sustainable if Quantum Assessment itself quashed

May 10, 2015 3597 Views 0 comment Print

Since basis for visiting assessee with penalty has been extinguished by quashing assessment order itself by Tribunal in appeal of assessee, impugned penalty imposed further had no leg to stand.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728