I.  Today's Topline News:   

1. Post Budget Memorandum - 2012 - Direct Taxes  (Click for detail)

2. Post Budget Memorandum - 2012 - Indirect Taxes  (Click for detail)

3. GAAR fear: Separate tax threshold likely for FIIs  (Click for detail)

4. Some companies in a fix over new financial account format, may postpone earnings announcement  (Click for detail)

5. RBI - CIRCULAR (External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) Policy – Liberalisation and Rationalisation)  (Click for detail)

6. RBI - CIRCULAR (External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) Policy – Refinancing _ Rescheduling of ECB)  (Click for detail)

7. RBI - CIRCULAR (Anti-Money Laundering_Combating Financing of Terrorism – Standards – UCBs)  (Click for detail)

II.  Useful Case laws:

1.   DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX Vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION, ITA No. 140/2012, Dated: 29.03.2012, HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Whether the income of the assessee being a Trust can be computed on commercial principles and while doing so whether depreciation on fixed assets can be allowed.

On this issue, there seems to be a consensus of judicial thinking, having regard to the consensus of judicial opinion, we are not inclined to admit the appeal and frame any substantial question of law. There does not appear to be any contrary view plausible on the question raised before us and at any rate no judgment taking a contrary view has been brought to our notice.

(Please Click here for judgment)

2.  I M CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Dated: 27.03.2012, W.P.(C) No. 8068/2011, HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Whether when notice u/s 148 is issued, Revenue is not required to verify the change in address of the assessee - Whether when assessee is aware of the fact that a notice has been issued but wrongly dispatched to his old address, the same is to be treated as deemed served - Whether the requirement u/s 149 is to 'issue notice' and not 'service of notice' as mandated u/s 34 of I-T Act, 1922.

The stand of the Revenue that they are required to look and refer to the income tax website and are not required to verify records and the subsequent returns to ensure that the notices are sent to correct addresses is not acceptable. The AO in case of doubt should examine and verify whether new/changed address is mentioned in the returns filed for subsequent years.

The petitioner has not disputed or denied the fact that the notice dated 22.3.2011 was issued to the petitioner at the address mentioned in the I.T return. The petitioner was aware and knew that the AO has issued the notice u/s 148 at the address mentioned in the return; the requirement stipulated in Section 149 is “issue of notice” and not “service of notice”, which was the requirement u/s 34 of the Income Tax Act, 1922. The assessment proceedings are still pending and have not culminated in passing of any order. In the meanwhile, the petitioner has come to know about the said assessment proceedings. The assessee can be treated as “served” with the notice u/s 148, which was earlier issued at the address mentioned in the return. The assessee can now filed the return of income pursuant to the said notice and the assessment proceedings can continue.

(Please Click here for judgment)

Key of Success :

"When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know
but if you listen, you may learn something new"

Thanks for your valuable time

"Voice of CA"