CA, CS, CMA : Learn how banks use stock and receivables audits to independently verify inventory and debtors before allowing working capital wit...
CA, CS, CMA : The article explains how inadequate insurance coverage of hypothecated stock can expose banks to major financial losses despite va...
CA, CS, CMA : Differences between audited balance sheets and stock statements can significantly impact drawing power calculations. This article ...
CA, CS, CMA : The Audit Committee ensures oversight of audits, controls, and compliance beyond financial reporting. Its effectiveness depends on...
CA, CS, CMA : This explains what materiality means in an audit and why it matters for financial decision-making. The key takeaway is that materi...
Income Tax : Join us for an insightful session with CA Bikash Bogi, a seasoned tax expert with over 15 years of practical experience, as he bre...
Company Law : Multinational companies cannot conduct surrogate audit work in India under Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 and Companies Act, 2013...
CA, CS, CMA : Get expert support on auditing aspects for statutory audits. ICAIs Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AASB) forms an expert p...
CA, CS, CMA : Discover the catalytic role of audit in enhancing efficiency and effectiveness, as emphasized by the Comptroller and Auditor Gener...
CA, CS, CMA : Explore the essential aspects of audit documentation, its nature, purposes, and compliance requirements. Learn best practices for ...
Service Tax : The High Court in this regard stayed CAG audit of a private limited company providing warehouse and logistical support services in...
Service Tax : Gujarat High Court granted stay on conducting audit of records of taxpayers under 5A of Service Tax Rules, 1994, by Officers of C&...
Finance : The Delhi High Court has delivered a judgement in the case of Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India Versus Uni...
Income Tax : and contributed by the assessee to a firm towards capital contribution should be treated as stock in trade even during the course ...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court (HC) [2010-TIOL42-HC-DEL-IT] in the case of CIT v. Industrial Finance Corporation of India (Taxpayer) which...
Company Law : The ROC Ahmedabad penalized the company and its director for failing to appoint independent directors and constitute an audit comm...
Goods and Services Tax : Learn about the latest directive from the Ministry of Finance regarding joint audits by CGST and SGST officers. Understand the fra...
Company Law : NFRA issued a circular highlighting statutory auditors' obligations to report fraud in accordance with Companies Act, 2013. Circu...
CA, CS, CMA : (1) These Regulations may be called Regulations on Audit and Accounts (Amendments) 2020 (2) They shall come into force on the date...
CA, CS, CMA : Labour Department, Government of Haryana vide its Notification No. 11/38/2016-4Lab dated 10th August, 2016 formulated Third Party ...
FOR the Income Tax Department, the latest ruling of the Larger Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court amounts to a big win. And, at the centre of the dispute was whether the interest paid on borrowed capital for purchasing new plant and machinery before the same is put to use is revenue expenditure or to be added to the ‘actual cost’ of the asset? What further complicated the issue was the fact that the assessee was a running company and wanted to set up a new plant by buying new machinery out of borrowed capital.
THE assessee company was incorporated during the financial year 1997-98. Originally, there was a company jointly promoted by Tatas and IBM , which were known as Tata IBM. During the financial year 1997-98, it was mutually agreed between the two promoters to bifurcate the business activities into separate entities viz. IBM Global Services India Private Limited (the assessee company) and Tata IBM . As per the agreement entered into, various assets of the erstwhile Tat IBM were transferred to the assessee company has paid amounts of Rs. 9,38,57,925/ – and Rs. 5.3 Crore on account of transfer of certain employees to the assessee company and on account of transfer of the data base of the domestic business. The assessee company actually paid a sum of Rs. 18.4 crore for the transfer of the employees to the assessee company but claimed an expenditure of Rs. 9,38,57,925/ – as the remaining sum of around Rs. 9.01 crore was attributable to STP Unit, income of which was exempt.
The Institute has been receiving complaints from members of the Institute, proprietary concerns and firms of Chartered Accountants alleging that they have come across audit reports, balance sheets, certificates etc. of different entities submitted by the said entities/someone with Banks, Financial Institutions, Income-Tax Department, etc. wherein they find that their signatures, seal/stamp have been forged and /or such documents have been prepared on their forged letterhead etc. The members of the Institute, proprietary concerns and firms of chartered Accountants have been requesting the Institute to take necessary legal action in such matters.
It was incumbent on the Assessing Officer to show in the reasons recorded by him that any income escaped assessment due to error or omission on the part of the assessee in not disclosing all material facts relevant for assessment of this year. The assessment order does not show any error or omission on the part of the assessee in disclosing all material facts. So the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was right in cancelling the re-assessment.
THE facts of the case are on a Search & seizure operations carried out at the business premises of the assessee company on 18-3-02 notice u/s 158BC of the I.T. Act, 1961, served on the assessee it was alleged that the assessee that a sum of Rs.54,45,000/ – which was received by the assessee from its sister concern M/s PMC Entertainment Pvt. Ltd, as application money was nothing but the assessee company’s own money which was brought into the books in the garb of application money and the whole transaction was managed, sham and was a deliberate arrangement to subvert the interest of revenue.
Companies shall be required to appoint agencies to monitor the utilisation of funds raised through public and rights issues, and report any deviation in utilisation to the stock exchanges, the Securities and Exchange Board of India announced on Thursday. They will also have to make public the adverse comments of their audit committee (or of the monitoring agency they have appointed) through advertisements in the newspapers.
Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF) 2007-08. View Multipurpose Panel 2007-08 Corrections are being processed, the final panel will be available as soon as possible.
The rigour of sec.43B may be applicable in the case of Sales-tax or Excise Duty but the same cannot be said to be the position in case of Service-tax because of two reasons. Firstly, the Assessee is never allowed deduction on account of service tax which is collected on behalf of the Govt., and paid to the Govt. accordingly. Therefore, a service provider is merely acting as an agent of the Govt., and is not entitled to claim deduction on account of service tax. Hence, on this account alone addition under sec.43B could not be made
Tarun Ghia Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others The Petitioner is a Chartered Accountant in practice and claims to be qualified to undertake the audit of societies as contemplated under Section 81 (1)(a) and 81(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. He was on the panel of auditors maintained by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies – Respondent No.3. According to the Petitioner the powers of empanelment, removal and other matters relating to functioning of the Chartered Accounts in contemplation to those provision was arbitrary and discretionary; and the Respondents were acting in a very unfair manner. On these 2 premises the Petitioner prayed for an issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent No.3 to produce the entire records in connection with the list of societies with basic details like turnover, working capital, audit fees of the previous year and the Respondents be directed to prepare proper guidelines introducing transparency and fairness in empanelment of the auditors for awarding of auditing work in the co-operative societies. The Petitioner has further prayed that Respondent No.3 should publish the list and the consideration for empanelment should be objective and not supported by extraneous criteria.
Section 271B, read with section 44AB, of the Income-tax, 1961 – Penalty – For failure to get accounts audited – Assessment years 1987-88 to 1989-90 – Whether section 271B is not attracted in a case where no account has been maintained and instead recourse under section 271A can be taken – Held, yes
