Connect us       New User?     Subscribe Now
Confirm your Email ID for Updates
28.03.2014 - Voice of CA presents - Updates
Friday, March 28, 2014
 

  I. Today's Headlines:    


Company Law Rules notified under companies act, 2013
    • Order proposed to be issued under section 470 of the Companies Act, 2013  (Click here)
    • Chapter II -Incorporation of Company and Matters Incidental Thereto  (Click here)
    • Chapter III -Prospectus and Allotment of Securities  (Click here)
    • Chapter VIII -Declaration and Payment of Dividend  (Click here)
    • Chapter IX -Accounts of Companies (128 -138)  (Click here)
    • Chapter XI -Appointment and Qualifications of Directors  (Click here)
      ****************************************************************************
  1. Pricing pacts with MNCs soon to address tax grievances  (Click for detail)
  2. Breather for banks as Basel III deferred  (Click for detail)
  3. Sebi to conduct investor campaigns via mobile, Internet  (Click for detail)

II.  Direct Tax Case laws:

1.  Halliburton Export Inc. Vs. Assistant Director of Incom Tax (International Taxation), Circle-1(2), ITA No. 5209 of 2011, Date of Order: 14.02.2014, ITAT -  Delhi

Whether Receipts of foreign co. from software sales and support services provided in India could be taxed as royalty

Held No

Mumbai Bench Decision in group of cases Reliance Infocom Ltd. (supra) and Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Infrasoft Ltd. cited by the Department and Ld. counsel for the assessee respectively at the time of fresh hearing, we find that since the issue is covered in favour of the assessee and direct to delete the impugned addition made for sale of software and provisions of maintenance / other support services to the customers in India being not taxable.

(Please click here for judgment)

2.  Manoharlal Agarwal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Civil Application No. 7246 of 2013, Date of Order: 24.06.2013, High Court of Gujarat

Whether assessee claiming TDS refund via revised return within prescribed period of limitation as provided under section 139(5) which was not made in original return, will be available to assessee or not.

Held Yes

As the revised return submitted by the assessee is within the prescribed period of limitation as provided under sub-section (5) of section 139, it cannot be said that revised return submitted by the assessee was not within the limitation period.The department has taken too technical view and as such not justified in not giving the credit of TDS already deposited with the department, the particulars of which are mentioned in Form No.26(AS) for which revised return was submitted.

(Please click here for judgment)
 

 Golden Rules:

  "If egg is broken by outside force, life ends.
If broken by inside force, life begins.
Its true - Great things always begin from inside
"

 

  Thanks & Regards

Team

Voice of CA 

« Back
 
Online Poll
Connect Us       New User?     Subscribe Now