Connect us       New User?     Subscribe Now
Confirm your Email ID for Updates
24.09.2012 - Voice of CA Presents - Updates
Monday, September 24, 2012

 I . Whats New:

  1. For Permission to Vote by Post  for Election to the 22nd Councils and 21st Regional Councils (Click for detail)
  2. Form for Permission to Vote by Post for Election to the 22nd Councils and 21st Regional Councils  (Click for detail)
  3. FEMA Circular No. 32 : RBI directs bankers to bring revised FDI policy to notice of stakeholders (Click for detail) 
  4. Finance Minister Approves the Operational Features of the Rajiv Gandhi Equity Savings Scheme (RGESS)  (Click for detail) 
  5. Govt tightens scrutiny of companies' fund raising plans  (Click for detail) 

   II.  Useful Case Laws: 

1.  M/s Greaves Leasing Finance Ltd. Vs. ITO, ITA No. 5634/M/2009, Date oforder: 27.07.2012, ITAT – Mumbai

No Disallowance u/s 14A made if assessee has not incurred any expenditure to earn tax free income u/s 10(33)

It is evident from the record that the assessee has earned dividend mainly from shares of a ‘C’ Ltd. which was acquired through amalgamation of two companies. Further, it is also noticed that most of the expenses are directly attributable to assessee’s business. Under these facts and circumstances, it cannot be held that assessee might have incurred any kind of expenditure for earning of dividend income. Moreover, looking to the fact that assessee has itself disallowed 1 per cent of the dividend income i.e., Rs. 15,283 as an expenditure, no further disallowance is called for.

(Please click here for judgment)

2.  Vijaya Silk House (Bangalore) Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Anr., Writ Petition No. 2446 OF 2010, Dated : 16-08-2012, High court of Bombay

Whether Retrospective effect given to 3rd & 4th Provisos to section 80HHC is ultra virus?

HELD by the Bombay High Court:

In Avani Exports, it was held that the amendment is violative for its retrospective operation in order to overcome the decision of the Tribunal, and at the same time, for depriving the benefit earlier granted to a class of the assessee whose assessments were still pending although such benefit will be available to the assessee whose assessments have already been concluded. In other words, in this type of substantive amendment, retrospective operation can be given only if it is for the benefit of the assessee but not in a case where it affects even a fewer section of the assessee. The amendment was quashed to the extent that the operation of the said section could be given effect from the date of the amendment and not in respect of earlier assessment years of the assesses whose export turnover is above Rs. 10 Crore. In other words, the retrospective amendment should not be detrimental to any of the assessee. As the Supreme Court had transferred all the matters to the Gujarat High Court in order to avoid confusion and difficulties in enforcement of conflicting judgments of different High Courts, it would be appropriate to follow the judgment of the Gujarat High Court.

(Please click here for judgment) 


 III.  Tenders Info.:   

  • Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd.
    Services in Fields of Accounts, Finance & Internal Controls
    Patiala - Punjab
    (Click for detail) 
  •  Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
    Chartered Accountant for service tax related works
    Ranchi - Jharkhand
    (Click for detail) 

  Golden Rules:

"The sign of maturity is not, 
when we start speaking big things. 
But actually it is
when we start understanding small things"


  Thanks & Regards

  Team - Voice of CA 





« Back
Online Poll
Connect Us       New User?     Subscribe Now