Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Orders

Transfers & Postings Of CIT, DCIT/ ACIT – Order No. 92 & 94 of 2013

June 1, 2013 2265 Views 0 comment Print

CBDT has Vide Order No. 92 of 2013 dated 31.05.2013, ordered the transfer/ posting of several officers in the grade of Chief Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) with immediate effect. CBDT has Vide Order No. 94 of 2013 dated 31.05.2013 ordered the transfer/ posting of several officers in the grade of Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (DCIT) / Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (ACIT) with immediate effect.

DVAT 51 reconciliation return Qtr 1 to 4 of 2011-12 extended to 10/06/2013

May 30, 2013 1597 Views 0 comment Print

No.F.3(33)/P-II/ VAT/ Misc j2006/206-216 , Dated: 27/05/2013 Sub-rule (1) of Rule 67 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 and Rule 4 of the Central Sales Tax(Delhi) Rules, 2005 for furnishing of reconciliation return in Form DVAT-51; and,

Format for seeking clarifications on FDI policy issues

May 10, 2013 1523 Views 0 comment Print

This Department has been receiving a large number of requests from various stakeholders seeking clarifications on the provisions of FDI policy. It is noted that many of the requests for clarification do not provide specific/ adequate details of the proposal. As a result, this Department is unable to take decision/ provide clarifications on such references.

DVAT 51 reconciliation return Qtr 1 to 4 of 2011-12 extended to 27/05/2013

May 9, 2013 726 Views 0 comment Print

Central Sales tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules 1957, for furnishing of the portion marked ‘original’ of the Declaration Forms ‘C’, ‘E-I’ or ‘E-II’, ‘F’, ‘I’, ‘J’, and ‘H’ respectively, as per the following time schedule for the year 2011-12:-

Rate of tax on Non-Dairy Whipp Topping under Delhi Value Added Tax, 2004?

May 7, 2013 3199 Views 0 comment Print

After going through the various schedules appended with the DVAT Act and judgment passed in the case of M/s Rich Graviss Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, U.P., Lucknow by Commercial Taxes, Tribunal, U.P., Lucknow (Full Bench), I am of the considered view that that item i.e. ‘Non-Dairy Whipp Topping’ is preparation of fats […]

Whether Patang Charkhi, Dor & Manjha exempt from Tax under DVAT Act, 2004?

May 7, 2013 1455 Views 0 comment Print

After going through the various schedules appended with the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004, I am of the considered view that items Patang Dor, Patang Manjha and Patang Charkhi are not covered by any other entry of any other schedule appended to the said Act and hence is an unspecified items under section (4) […]

Posting Of Probationer Assistant Commissioners Of Income-tax – Order No. 71/2013

April 26, 2013 657 Views 0 comment Print

Vide Order No. 71 of 2013 dated 25.04.2013, the CBDT has posted several Assistant Commissioners of Income-tax (probationers) in the Pay Scale of Rs. 15,600-39,100 (Plus Grade pay of Rs. 5,400 in PB-3), on completion of training at National Academy of Direct Taxes, Nagpur in the Region of CCIT(CCA)/Station/Charge indicated against each with immediate effect and until further orders.

ST-3 Due date of Oct 12 to Mar 13 extended to 31.08.2013

April 23, 2013 3961 Views 0 comment Print

n exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule(4) of rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, the Central Board of Excise & Customs hereby extends the date of submission of the Form ST-3, for the period from 1st October 2012 to 31st March 2013, from 25th April, 2013 to 31st August, 2013. The circumstanc

A company not in dominant position if there are number of Companies providing similar services

April 17, 2013 378 Views 0 comment Print

Learned counsel very earnestly argued that the CCI was incorrect in firstly deciding upon the relevant market and secondly on the aspect of the respondent being a dominant player in the market. The learned counsel wanted to rely on the prospectus of the respondent which, in our view, would be an irrelevant document to decide the dominance in the market. The informant was expected to point out as to how the respondent enjoyed the dominant position in the market, by collection of evidence and the facts. That unfortunately seems not to have been done by the informant. We cannot find fault, under the circumstances, with the finding of the CCI that the respondent was not enjoying the dominant position in the market. Once that factual position is arrived at, there will be no question of contravention of Section 4 of the Act. If the respondent was not dominant, there was no question of the abuse of dominance.

CBEC extends last date of e-filing of Service Tax Return for July-Sep 2012 to 30.04.2013

April 13, 2013 3501 Views 0 comment Print

Due date for filing of service tax returns in Form ST-3 for the period 1st July, 2012 to 30th September 2012 was extended from 15th April, 2013 to 30th April, 2013. Considering the difficulties in filing returns, causing inconvenience to the assessee, the CBEC had revised the due date of  filing ST-3 Return. CBEC extends […]

Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031