I.  What's New Today : 

1. Central Excise Notification No. 21 - Every Central Excise Assessee required to file the return electronically  (Click for detail) 

2. Central Excise Notification No. 22 - CENVAT Credit ( Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2011-Every assessee shall file electronically, the declaration or the return  (Click for detail)

3. Service Tax Notification No. 45 - Service falling under (zzzzm)(iii) exempted from service tax  (Click for detail)

4. Central Excise Notification No. 20 - Central Excise Return Form E.R-1 amended  (Click for detail)

5. Department of Expenditure No. 7/24/2007/E III (A)- Thirty Days Bonus to Govt Employees  (Click for detail)

6. RBI/2011-12/177 - Credit of sale proceeds of Foreign Direct Investments in India to NRE/FCNR (B) accounts  (Click for detail)

7. RBI/2011-12/176 - Exchange Earners Foreign Currency (EEFC) Account and Resident Foreign Currency (RFC) account – Joint holder - liberalisation  (Click for detail)

8. RBI/2011-12/175 - Foreign Investments in India-Transfer of security by way of gift  (Click for detail)
   
    

II.  Judicial Pronouncements :

1.    CIT, Delhi Vs Kinetic Capital Finance Ltd (Dated: September 2, 2011), ITA No. 87/2007, Delhi High Court

held:
that while making an addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the A.O. has to advert to each and every entry and not pick up a couple of entries, as in the present case, and label the entire set of deposits made during the assessment year as undisclosed income of the assessee.

Merely because certain application forms of depositors did not contain their PAN and GIR numbers, cheque numbers and draft numbers would not make the forms invalid so as to make addition u/s 68.

Merely because of the reason that some investors had chosen not to respond to the notices, or the assessee had not been able to produce the investors, would not render the addition u/s 68 as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee when an unexplained credit is found in the books of account of an assessee the initial onus is placed on the assessee. The assessee is required to discharge this initial onus. Once that onus is discharged, it is for the revenue to prove that the credit found in the books of accounts of the assessee is the undisclosed income of the assessee. In the circumstances obtaining in the present case, the assessee has discharged that initial onus. The assessee is not required thereafter to prove the genuineness of the transactions as between its creditors and that of the creditors’ source of income, i.e., the sub-creditors;

(Please click here for judgment)

  

2.  Gates India Ltd Vs DCIT, New Delhi (Dated: July 29, 2011) , ITA Nos.2534 & 2535/Del/2011, Delhi-ITAT

The expenditure incurred in respect of support charges is obviously revenue in nature. The TDS software is not used in the process of manufacture. Therefore, it can be said on functional basis that the expenditure is revenue in nature. Further, anti software virus is purchased to protect other softwares and, therefore, the expenditure is of revenue nature.

The burden to prove that expenditure is revenue in nature, is on the assessee, which has to be discharged by filing relevant facts.

expenses incurred on purchase of backup software is an expenditure on intangible asset particularly when the assessee cannot provide any details regarding its life span, nature and utility. In absence of facts, it cannot be said that the expenditure is revenue in nature.

(Please click here for judgment)

 

Key of Success :

"Never stop in the pursuit of knowledge and Stay focused on the priorities"

  

Thanks for your valuable time

   

"Voice of CA"  

  
CA. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal
Founder - Voice of CA 
Mob : 9811080342, agarwal.s.ca@gmail.com      
   
CA. Sidharth Jain, Co-Moderator
sidhjasso@yahoo.com 
  
CA. Mukesh K Bansal, Co-Moderator-FEMA 
mukbansal80@gmail.com