25 January 2013

Number of branch audits to come down drastically

 

List of various firms to be allotted statutory branch auditors by banks has been forwarded to banks by RBI yesterday with threshold limit as 20 crores. Number of branch audits to come down drastically.

21 January 2013

SC on Depreciation

SUPREME COURT DECISION ON DEPRECIATION

'Leasing firm entitled to depreciation if the lessee uses the vehicle for hiring'

It is not necessary that the assessee must have used the asset itself in order to be entitled to depreciation, held the Supreme Court in ICDS Ltd v CIT. It was contended by the revenue that one of the requirements for grant of depreciation is use of the asset by the assessee and in case of lease of the asset by the assessee, it simply could not have used the asset as it was physically with the lessee. The apex court, while rejecting this contention, held that user contemplated was for the purpose of business. It was indeed used for the purpose of business when the asset was leased and the lessee used it. That the vehicle was registered in the name of the lessee with the transport authorities, need not come in the way of grant of depreciation, said the court. It also upheld the claim of the leasing company that since the lessee used the vehicle for his business of running it on hire, the vehicle should beget heightened depreciation reserved for such vehicles. In short, in case of leasing, the tax benefits predicated on the type of use would devolve on to the leasing company from the lessee.

ICAI: Final and CPT results

ICAI: Final and CPT results:

http://caresults.nic.in/final/final_roll.asp

19 January 2013

CENTRALISED PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE SCHEME, 2013

CENTRALISED PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE SCHEME, 2013
NOTIFICATION NO. 3/2013[F.NO.142/39/2012-SO(TPL)], DATED 15-1-2013

The Bombay High Court today (17.01.2013) granted ad-interim stay against coercive recovery pursuant to Circular No. 967/01/ 2013 – CX dated 01.01.2013 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The orders were passed in the case of Uhde India Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI WP 380 of 2013, Exide Industries Ltd vs. UOI WP No. 381 of 2013 and connected matters. The Petitions are now listed for admission on 31.01.2013 to enable the Department to file a reply. The Andhra Pradesh High Court has already granted on 09.01.2013 a stay in the matter in the case of Ultratech Cement Ltd vs. UOI W.P. No. 736 of 2013.
The view that is taken by the High Courts in these matters will have considerable bearing in income-tax matters as well.

Gujarat Municipal Finance Board

Gujarat Municipal Finance Board

Proposal for Project Management & Training Unit (PMTU) Cell for
Accrual Based, Double - Entry Accounting System in
Municipalities of Gujarat State

Click the link:


18 January 2013

Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited

Description :Proposals from the firms of chartered accountants

Last Date : 02/02/2013

Address :Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited 7th Floor,Block No.12,New Sachivalaya Complex, Gandhinagar-382010.

Phone :23252767 

Click the link below:



17 January 2013

AP High Court Stay Order-Recovery of Demand dues

The High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh has granted an interim stay against  Circular No.  967/01/2013 – CX, Dated 1st January, 2013 issued by the CBEC, seeking the recovery of confirmed demand during pendency of stay application.


GAAR-01-04-2016


Major Recommendations of Expert Committee on GAAR Accepted


The Central Government has carefully considered the report of the Expert Committee on General Anti Avoidance Rules (GAAR) and accepted the major recommendations of the Expert Committee with some modifications. This was announced by the Union Finance Minstar Shri P.Chidambaram here today in a press conference. The Finance Minister said that the following decisions have been taken by Government in this regard:
(i)           An arrangement, the main purpose of which is to obtain a tax benefit, would be considered as an impermissible avoidance arrangement.  The current provision prescribing that it should be "the main purpose or one of the main purposes" will be amended accordingly.

(ii)          The assessing officer will be required to issue a show cause notice,containing reasons, to theassessee before invoking the provisions of Chapter X-A.

(iii)        The assessee shall have an opportunity to prove that the arrangement is not an impermissible avoidance arrangement.

(iv)      The two separate definitions in the current provisions, namely, 'associated person' and 'connected person' will be combined and there will be only one inclusive provision defining a 'connected person'.

(v)         The Approving Panel shall consist of a Chairperson who is or has been a Judge of a High Court; one Member of the Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Chief Commissioner of Income-tax; and one Member who shall be an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices.  The current provision that the Approving Panel shall consist of not less than three members being Income-tax authorities or officers of the Indian Legal Service will be substituted.

(vi)        The Approving Panel may have regard to the period or time for which the arrangement had existed; the fact of payment of taxes by the assessee; and the fact that an exit route was provided by the arrangement. Such factors may be relevant but not sufficient to determine whether the arrangement is an impermissible avoidance arrangement.

(vii)       The directions issued by the Approving Panel shall be binding on the assessee as well as the Income-tax authorities.  The current provision that it shall be binding only on the Income-tax authorities will be modified accordingly. 

(viii)     While determining whether an arrangement is an impermissible avoidance arrangement, it will be ensured that the same income is not taxed twice in the hands of the same tax payer in the same year or in different assessment years.

(ix)        Investments made before August 30, 2010, the date of introduction of the Direct Taxes Code, Bill, 2010, will be grandfathered.

(x)         GAAR will not apply to such FIIs that choose not to take any benefit under an agreement under section 90 or section 90A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. GAAR will also not apply to non-resident investors inFIIs.

(xi)        A monetary threshold of Rs. 3 crore of tax benefit in the arrangement will be provided in order to attract the provisions of GAAR.   

(xii)       Where a part of the arrangement is an impermissible avoidance arrangement, GAAR will be restricted to the tax consequence of that part which is impermissible and not to the whole arrangement.

(xiii)     Where GAAR and SAAR are both in force, only one of them will apply to a given case, and guidelines will be made regarding the applicability of one or the other.


(xiv)     Statutory forms will be prescribed for the different authorities to exercise their powers under section 144BA.

(xv)      Time limits will be provided for action by the various authorities under GAAR. 

(xvi)     Section 245N(a)(iv) that provides for an advance ruling by the Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) whether an arrangement is an impermissible avoidance arrangement will be retained and the administration of the AAR will be strengthened.

(xvii)    The tax auditor will be required to report any tax avoidance arrangement.

                                Further, having considered all the circumstances and relevant factors, the Government has also decided that the provisions of Chapter X-A will come into force with effect from April 1, 2016 (as against the current provision of April 1, 2014).
                    A number of countries have provided for General Anti Avoidance Rules (GAAR) in matters relating to taxation. While tax mitigationis recognized, tax avoidance is frowned upon.  International literature describes tax avoidance as the legal exploitation of tax laws to one's own advantage and an arrangement entered into solely or primarily for the purpose of obtaining a tax advantage.
                                                 The principle of GAAR was incorporated in the Direct Taxes Code which was introduced as a Bill in Parliament on August 30, 2010.
                       Pending consideration of the Bill, the Income-tax Act, 1961 was amended by Finance Bill, 2012 to add Chapter X-A titled 'General Anti- Avoidance Rule'. It became part of the law when the Finance Bill was passed by Parliament.  Draft GAAR guidelines were also published.  Under the current provisions, Chapter X-A would come into force with effect from April 1, 2014.
              A number of representations were received against the provisions contained in Chapter X-A.  Hence, on July 13, 2012, the Prime Minister approved the constitution of an Expert Committee on GAAR to undertake stakeholder consultations and finalize the guidelines for GAAR.  Accordingly, an Expert Committee consisting of Dr.Parthasarathi Shome and three others was constituted on July 17, 2012 with broad terms of reference including consultation with stakeholders and finalizing the GAAR guidelines and a roadmap for implementation. 
                         The Expert Committee submitted its draft report on August 31, 2012 which was placed in the public domain on September 1, 2012.  After examining the responses to the draft, the Expert Committee submitted its final report on September 30, 2012.
     The final report of the Expert Committee has been now put on the website of the Ministry of Finance i.e.finmin.nic.in.
                                   
                 

XBRL Date Extended upto 15-02-2013


General Circular number 01/2013 dated 15.01.2013
As per General Circular number 01/2013 dated 15.01.2013, time limit to file financial statements in XBRL mode (for the financial year commencing on or after 01.04.2011) without any additional fee has been extended upto 15th February´ 2013or within 30 days of AGM of the company, which ever is later.

07 January 2013

Assocham on IT re-assessment

Showing a grave concern over the fact that notices for reopening of assessments by the tax authorities are being issued in thousands in recent times, ASSOCHAM today said returns should not be re-opened beyond three years.

As Finance Minister P Chidambaram has started his pre-budget consultations with different stakeholders, the ASSOCHAM has submitted a detailed memorandum to the Finance Ministry seeking changes in Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act . These sections relate to the tax re-assessment on matters already examined or in a blanket manner.

"In recent times, tax reopening notices under sections 147/148 have become a very common occurrence and such notices are being served in thousands across the country, the ASSOCHAM memorandum said. It appears that there is no consideration in following the principles on the subject laid down by the Supreme Court and High Courts over the years, it added.

Simple audit observations, even on points of law, are frequently being used as grounds for re-opening leading to "extreme harassment of all assesses. In fact, the position has become so bad that even for legislations which have become obsolete, like  Interest Tax (withdrawn in Finance Act,2001), reopening are being done for very old years  since the relevant law permitted reopening without any time limit", added ASSOCHAM paper.
ASSOCHAM President Rajkumar N Dhoot said the provisions relating to reopening of tax assessments are being misused in different locations, particularly for salaried assesses, where scrutiny assessment is not possible as per the CBDT (Central Board of Direct Tax) guidelines. This has become a breeding ground for corruption and harassment.
"It is suggested that a new proviso to Section 147 should state tall matters which have been examined in the original assessment should not be reassessed," said Mr Dhoot. He also said the annual income tax assessment/reassessment procedure should be normal and routine and should not provide for excessive powers to harass assesses.


05 January 2013

NIRC-RC: The final results of Regional Council Elections

Rank
Name
City
Total
1st Pref Votes
1
KEDIA GOPAL KUMAR
NEW DELHI
1299
1162
2
CHUGH HANS RAJ
NEW DELHI
1299
842
3
GARG VISHAL
LUDHIANA
1299
1058
4
GUPTA SWADESH
DELHI
1299
872
5
BANSAL RADHEY SHYAM
DELHI
1299
800
6
ANAND YOGITA
NEW DELHI
1299
409
7
CHAWLA RAJ
DELHI
1278
518
8
BANSAL MANOJ KUMAR
NEW DELHI
1219
747
9
AGRAWAL HARIT
DELHI
1183
605
10
GARG DEEPAK
FARIDABAD
1152
809
11
NARANG RAJINDER
FATEHABAD
1145
702
12
AGRAWAL RAJESH KUMAR
NEW DELHI
1108
661
13
MAHESHWARI PRAMOD KUMAR
FARIDABAD
989
620
14
MAKKAR RAKESH
DELHI
896
437
15
ALOK KRISHAN
MOHALI
811
625
16
GARG GAURAV
DELHI
744
519
17
KHURANA VIVEK
DELHI
715
460
18
AJIT KUMAR
NEW DELHI
694
506
19
KATHPALIA ASHWANI KUMAR
NEW DELHI
650
505
20
KHETRAPAL RASHMI
GURGAON
599
344
21
AGRAWAL SUNIL KUMAR
DELHI
558
442
22
GARG SUMIT
DELHI
503
372
23
GOYAL SATISH
DELHI
491
401
24
BONS JAGMOHAN SINGH
NEW DELHI
426
324
25
JAIN ALOK
NEW DELHI
400
300
26
TAYAL ANIL
DELHI
384
309
27
RAJENDER ARORA
DELHI
363
286
28
KANWAR NITIN
DELHI
336
290
29
BANSAL PUNEET KUMAR
NEW DELHI
314
278
30
KEJRIWAL MAN MOHAN
NEW DELHI
309
294
31
ARORA TARUN
DELHI
232
203
32
KAPUR ANIL
NEW DELHI
216
204
33
SINGHAL SANJAY KUMAR
NEW DELHI
202
193
34
GUPTA DEEPAK
NEW DELHI
181
170
35
JAIN VINEET
NEW DELHI
168
150
36
RAJIV KUMAR
DELHI
139
132
37
GUPTA JITENDER
DELHI
120
116
38
JHA KUBER NATH
DELHI
99
99
39
SEKHON MALDEEP SINGH
DELHI
94
91
40
RASTOGI SUNIL KUMAR
DELHI
88
84
41
JAIN SUMNISH KUMAR
NEW DELHI
78
76
42
JAIN GAURAV
DELHI
74
73
43
MUKESH KUMAR JAIN
DELHI
46
45
44
TAYAL ASHWANI
BADDI
32
32
45
GOYAL ASHVANI
DELHI
22
22


Empanel as Concurrent Auditors

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA invites online applications from practicing firms of Chartered Accountants, in the prescribed format, who are willing to...