I.  Today's News:   

1. Fin Min: GDP growth likely at 7% in FY’13 and DTC Bill could be tabled in Parliament in  monsoon session  (Click for detail)

2. FEMA : RBI raises limit for inward remittances  (Click for detail)

3. LLP Registry is Now Merged with MCA-21 and Decentralization of LLP Approval to Various ROCs (Click for detail)

4. Govt proposes to increase tax scrutiny, reduce refunds  (Click for detail)

5. Charges Only Penalty will now Attract Service Tax  (Click for detail)

6. Facilitating Corporate Growth with Enlightened Regulation  (Click for detail)

II.  Useful Case law:

1.  M/s Purvanchal Construct ion Works (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range-14, New Delhi,  ITA No. 3/D/2011,  Assessment year: 2007-08, Date of pronouncement: 08-06-2012, ITAT – Delhi

Assessee need to prove that why payments could not be made by   crossed cheques/demand draft or that these were made out of sheer necessity under section 40A(3) of the Income tax Act,1961.

Held:

All these payments were made in single transaction as cash of that amount has been debited from the cash balance. The ld. CIT(A) also rejected the plea on behalf of the assessee that these figures were aggregate of the cash payments, being not supported by the evidence available on the record. In these circumstances, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance. There is nothing to suggest that the relevant material has not been considered by the lower authorities. Not even a whisper has been made before us as to why the aforesaid payments could not be made by crossed cheques/demand draft or that these were made out of sheer necessity. The transactions are of wholesale nature. We do not understand that how payments by crossed cheques/demand drafts can in such circumstances be held to be impracticable. Since the ld. AR has not placed before us any material, controverting the aforesaid findings of facts recorded by the ld. CIT(A) so as to enable us to take a different view in the matter, we are not inclined to interfere. Therefore, ground nos.1 & 2 in the appeal are dismissed.

(Please click here for judgment)

2.  Rahuljee & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribuncal-I & Others, ITA No. 157 OF 2011, Date of Pronouncement: 01-06-2012, Delhi High Court

If there is a foreign travel in connection with the business,  merely because in the said foreign travel, no business could be transacted or the foreign travel did not result in bagging any contract is not the determinative factor. The relevant factor was as to whether he was sent by the assessee abroad in connection with the business of the assessee.

Issuance of show cause notice is not a condition precedent before charging interest under Section 217 of the Act.

(Please click here for judgment)

• Punjab National Bank
  Proposal for External Audit
  New Delhi
  (Click for detail)

• Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd.
  Appointment of Consulting Firms
  Panchkula 
  (Click for detail)

"Don't look into the past because you have already been there,
focus on the future since that's where you are going"   

Thanks for your valuable time

"Voice of CA"