Friday, May 31, 2013

[aaykarbhavan] Income Tax Department directed to supply copy of ‘scrutiny guidelines' and upload them on the website:




 

 

 

2013-TIOL-303-HC-DEL-RTI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P .(C) 6773/2011
JOGINDER PAL GULATI
Vs
THE OFFICER ON SPECIAL DUTY ( ITA II) CUM CPIO AND ANR
Rajiv Shakdher , J
Dated : April 02, 2013
Appellant Rep. by : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Ms Rani Kiyala , Mrs Ayushi Pareek and Mr Shubham Rastogi , Advs. 
Respondent Rep. by : 
Mr Jatan Singh, CGSC with Mr Soayib Qureshi , Adv. for Resp./ UOI . Mr A.S . Singh, Adv. for R- 3 and 4.
Income Tax Department directed to supply copy of 'scrutiny guidelines' and upload them on the website: Petitioner seeks a direction to the Income Tax Department to supply the copy of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (in short CBDT ) circular/ instruction dated 19.06.2009. The information sought under the RTI Act from the Department which was refused.
The Department's argument is that in order to ensure that, there is no unfairness in selection of cases for scrutiny; guidelines are issued to the Assessing Officers in this behalf which, if revealed, would enable the assessees to manipulate their returns; that the information falls within the realm of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act and thus stands excluded as it would impact the economic interest of the country .
The High Court observed,
"The expression, economic interest, thus takes within its sweep matters which operate at a macro level and not at an individual, i.e., micro level. By no stretch of imagination can scrutiny guidelines impact economic interest of the country. These guidelines are issued to prevent harassment to assessees generally. It is not as if, de hors the scrutiny guidelines, the I.T . Department cannot take up a case for scrutiny, if otherwise, invested with jurisdiction, in that behalf. This is information which has always been in public realm, and therefore, there is no reason, why the respondents should keep it away from the public at large. Thus, provisions of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act would have no applicability in the instant case .
The High Court directed the Income Tax Department to supply the relevant scrutiny guidelines to the petitioner for the financial year 2009-10. They shall hereafter upload the guidelines with regard to scrutiny on their website.
JUDGEMENT
1. This writ petition has been filed to impugn the order of the Central Information Commission dated 12.07.2011. In addition, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to supply the copy of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (in short CBDT ) circular/ instruction dated 19.06.2009.
2. The petitioner, who is an advocate by profession, and is principally practicing in the field of income tax law, had filed an application dated 05.07.2010, with the CBDT under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short the RTI Act) seeking information pertaining to cases excluded from scrutiny, where the disclosure was made during survey. In addition to this, further information was sought qua scrutiny guidelines for the financial year 2009-10. The CPIO of the CBDT vide letter dated 19.07.2010 refused to supply information as sought for by the petitioner.
3. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed an appeal with the first appellate authority. In the appeal an additional request was made, for being supplied, the judgment dated 11.02.2008, passed by the CIC , in the case of Shri Kamal Anand . By order dated 03.08.2010 the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner was, however, supplied a copy of the CIC's judgment in the case of Kamal Anand .
4. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal with the CIC , which was dismissed by the impugned order. Importantly, with the appeal the petitioner had furnished copies of scrutiny guidelines for the financial year 2004-05 and 2007-08, which were in public domain.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is erroneous in law and on facts for the following reasons:
(i) The information with regard to scrutiny guidelines has all along been in public domain. For this purpose he has referred me to instructions issued by CBDT , from time to time, which have been appended at pages 83 to 99 of the paper book. These guidelines have been issued in the year 1983, 1999, 2003 and 2005.
(ii) The receipt of information qua scrutiny guidelines is necessary as it would enable him to advise his clients as to whether his client has been correctly picked up for random scrutiny. The aspects pertaining exercise of jurisdiction by concerned officer of the Income Tax Department, according to Mr Gupta, would turn on the contents of scrutiny guidelines.
(iii) Information has been denied purportedly under the provisions of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act on a specious ground that furnishing information with regard to scrutiny guidelines would impact the economic interest of the country.
5.1 Mr Gupta has submitted, given the fact that, in the past such information has been supplied, it is difficult to appreciate as to how economic interest of the country would now suddenly get impacted in scrutiny guidelines are put in public realm. This is especially so, in the circumstances that in order to ascertain whether or not an Assessing Officer has correctly exercised his jurisdiction, availability of the scrutiny guidelines in public domain, attains importance.
6. In rebuttal, Mr A.N . Singh and Mr Jatan Singh submitted that, in order to avoid harassment to the general public, and to ensure fairness in the selection of cases, which are taken up for scrutiny, the selection is done through what is known as : Computer Assisted Selection Scheme (CASS).
6.1 It is further submitted that, where there is economic manipulation, the selection of an assessee for scrutiny is carried out manually under the overall guidance of CBDT . In this category of cases, according to the learned counsels for the respondents, are included cases which are taken up for search and survey under Section 132 and 133 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the I.T . Act). It is submitted, in order to ensure that, there is no unfairness in selection of cases for scrutiny; guidelines are issued to the Assessing Officers in this behalf which , if revealed, would enable the assessees to manipulate their returns.
6.2 It is the contention of learned counsels for the respondents that, scrutiny guidelines are issued in the beginning of each financial year, which not only applies to pending returns, but also those returns which are filed thereafter. Any guideline issued, operates till such time a fresh guidelines is issued. By way of illustration, it is submitted that in respect of financial year 2009-10, the guideline would have been issued in the beginning of the financial year which would apply not only to the returns which were filed prior to the issuance of the guideline, but would also apply to those returns which are filed thereafter. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents that, therefore, the CIC has correctly upheld the stand of the respondents in declining the request of the petitioner for supply of information sought for, in the instant case. This information according to the learned counsels for respondents falls within the realm of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act and thus stands excluded as it would impact the economic interest of the country.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Undoubtedly, the instructions with regard to procedure for selection of cases for scrutiny have been issued from time to time both qua corporate assessees as well as non-corporate assessees . By way of example, one may only refer to instructions no. 1509 dated 13.05.1983, instruction no. 1967 dated 07.06.1999, instruction no. Nil of 2005 reported in (2005) 199 CTR (St.) 1, Instruction No. 11/2003 dated 17.10.2003 and Instruction no. 10/2003 dated 26.09.2003. These instructions give detailed procedure on the basis on which the concerned officers are required to make a random selection of assessees whose cases are taken up for scrutiny. As would be evident, these instructions were in public domain even prior to the enactment of the RTI Act.
7.1 Another aspect which comes to fore on perusal of the said instructions, is that most of these instructions have been issued in the middle of the financial year and not in the beginning as is sought to be contended before me; which is incidently also the stand taken before the CIC in Kamal Anand case.
7.2 Even if I were to accept the argument that the instructions for scrutiny are issued in the beginning of the financial year, that would make no material difference qua the case at hand as it is the case of the respondents themselves that, they apply the guidelines to pending returns as well. Therefore, the argument, that assessees would configure their returns in the manner, which would impact the economic interest of the country, cannot be accepted.
7.3 There is no definition of the expression "economic interest" in the RTI Act. As is ordinarily understood, the term economic would mean connected with or related to the economy. Economy would generally relate to aspects of wealth and resources of the country, its production, consumption and distribution. The term wealth, would include, I take it, the financial resources of the country. While the term 'interest' in the context of the RTI would mean financial stake. (See Concise Oxford Dictionary 9th Edition Pages 429-430 and Page 710).
7.4 The expression, economic interest, thus takes within its sweep matters which operate at a macro level and not at an individual, i.e., micro level. In my view, by no stretch of imagination can scrutiny guidelines impact economic interest of the country. These guidelines are issued to prevent harassment to assessees generally. It is not as if, de hors the scrutiny guidelines, the I.T . Department cannot take up a case for scrutiny, if otherwise, invested with jurisdiction, in that behalf. This is an information which has always been in public realm, and therefore, there is no reason, why the respondents should keep it away from the public at large. Thus, in my opinion, provisions of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act would have no applicability in the instant case.
8. In so far as the impugned order is concerned, there is nothing stated in the operative part which would seem to indicate that the CIC has come to the conclusion which it has, is based on the fact that, the economic interest of the country, will get effected. The CIC , in the operative part has merely recorded what has been conveyed to it vis -a- vis the procedure for selection of cases for scrutiny.
9. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside. The respondents shall supply the relevant scrutiny guidelines to the petitioner for the financial year 2009-10. The respondents shall hereafter upload the guidelines with regard to scrutiny on their website.
10. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
-- 




__._,_.___


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Acknowledgement by banks at the time of submission of Form 15-G / 15-H



RBI/2012-13/516
DBOD.No.Leg.BC.100/09.07.005/2012-13
May 31, 2013
All Scheduled Commercial Banks
(excluding RRBs)
Dear Sir/Madam,
Acknowledgement by banks at the time of submission of Form 15-G / 15-H
As you are aware banks are not required to deduct TDS from depositors who submit declaration in Form 15-G/15-H under Income Tax Rules, 1962. However, it has been brought to our notice that despite submission of Form 15-G/15-H by customers, banks are deducting tax at source, at times, causing inconvenience to customers resulting in a number of complaints.  Such instances arise because either the forms are misplaced or a track is not kept of forms received in the branches.
2. The matter has been examined by us in consultation with Indian Banks' Association (IBA). With a view to protect interest of the depositors and for rendering better customer service, banks are advised to give an acknowledgment at the time of receipt of Form 15-G/15-H. This will help in building a system of accountability and customers will not be put to inconvenience due to any omission on part of the banks.
Yours faithfully,
(Rajesh Verma)
Chief General Manager
 
Regards
Prarthana Jalan


__._,_.___


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] [ITR] INCOME-TAX (FOURTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 2013 - INSERTION OF RULES 6AAD & 6AAE AND F



INCOME-TAX (FOURTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 2013 - INSERTION OF RULES 6AAD & 6AAE AND FORM NOS.3C-O & 3CP

NOTIFICATION NO. 38/2013[F.NO.142/30/2012-SO(TPL)]/SO 1393(E), DATED 30-5-2013

In exercise of the powers conferred by section 295 read with sub-section (1) of section 35CCC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Income-tax Rules, 1962, namely:-
1. (1) These rules may be called the Income-tax (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2013.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In the Income-tax Rules, 1962, (hereinafter referred to as the "said rules"), after rule 6AAC, the following rules shall be inserted, namely:-
"6AAD. Guidelines for approval of agricultural extension project under section 35CCC.
(1) The agricultural extension project shall be considered for notification if it fulfils all of the following conditions namely:-
(i) the project shall be undertaken by an assessee for training, education and guidance of farmers;
(ii) the project shall have prior approval of the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India; and
(iii) the expenditure (not being expenditure in the nature of cost of any land or building) exceeding an amount of twenty-five lakh rupees is expected to be incurred for the project.
(2) An assessee, before undertaking any agricultural extension project, shall make an application for notification of such project under sub-section (1) of section 35CCC, in duplicate, in Form No. 3C-O, to the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the assessee.
(3) The assessee shall also send a copy of the application in Form No.3C-O to the Member (IT), Central Board of Direct Taxes (hereinafter referred to as the CBDT) accompanied by the acknowledgement receipt, as evidence of having furnished the application form in duplicate, in the office of the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, having jurisdiction over the case.
(4) The application shall be accompanied by the following, namely :--
(a) a detailed note on the agricultural extension project to be undertaken by the assessee;
(b) details of the expenditure expected to be incurred on the project and expected date of completion of the project; and
(c) a letter approving the project and specifying the amount of expenditure expected to be incurred on the project from the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
(5) If any defect is noticed in the application referred to in sub-rule (2) or if any relevant document is not attached thereto, the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, shall, before the expiry of one month from the date of receipt of the application in his office, intimate the defect to the applicant for its rectification.
(6) The applicant shall remove the defect within a period of fifteen days from the date of such intimation or within such further period which, on an application made in this behalf, as may be extended by the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, so however, that the total period for removal of defect does not exceed thirty days, and if the applicant fails to remove the defect within such period so allowed, the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, shall send his recommendation for treating the application as invalid to the CBDT.
(7) On receipt of recommendation of the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, under sub-rule (6), the CBDT, if satisfied, may pass an order treating the application as invalid.
(8) If the application form is complete in all respects, the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, may make such inquiry or call for such documents from the assessee as he may consider necessary for satisfying himself regarding the genuineness of the current and proposed activities of the assessee, and send his recommendation to the CBDT for grant of approval or rejection of the application before the expiry of the period of two months to be reckoned from the end of the month in which the application form complete in all respects was received in his office.
(9) The CBDT may, before notifying an agricultural extension project under section 35CCC, call for such documents from the assessee, as it considers necessary, and may also get any inquiry made for verification of the genuineness of the activities of the assessee.
(10) The CBDT may, within a period of three months from the end of the month in which it receives the report referred to in sub-rule (8) from the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, under sub-section (1) of section 35CCC, issue a notification in Form No. 3CP to be published in the Official Gazette specifying the agricultural extension project subject to conditions mentioned in rule 6AAE or such other conditions, as it may deem fit, to be effective for such period not exceeding three assessment years or pass an order rejecting the application.
(11) If the CBDT is satisfied with the activities of the agricultural extension project during the period of notification, it may notify the said project for a further period.
(12) A copy of the notification issued under sub-rule (10) or sub-rule (11) shall be sent to the applicant, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, the Department of Agriculture of the concerned State, and the Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) of the concerned District(s).
(13) The CBDT may rescind the notification issued under sub-rule (10) or sub-rule (11) at any time, if it is satisfied that the assessee has ceased its activities or its activities are not genuine or are not being carried out in accordance with all or any of the relevant provisions of the Act or this rule or rule 6AAE or are not being carried out in accordance with all or any of the conditions subject to which the notification was issued.
(14) An order treating the application as invalid or rejecting or rescinding the notification shall not be passed unless the assessee has been given an opportunity of being heard in the matter.
(15) A copy of any order invalidating or rejecting the application or rescinding the notification shall be sent to the applicant, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, the Department of Agriculture of the concerned State, and the Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) of the concerned District(s).
6AAE. Conditions subject to which an agricultural extension project is to be notified under section 35CCC.
(1) The assessee undertaking agricultural extension project shall maintain separate books of account of the agricultural extension project notified under sub-section(1) of section 35CCC, and get such books of account audited by an accountant as defined in the Explanation below sub-section (2) of section 288.
(2) The audit report referred to in sub-rule (1) shall include the comments of the auditor on the true and fair view of the books of account maintained for agricultural extension project, the genuineness of the activities of the agricultural extension project and fulfillment of the conditions specified in the relevant provisions of the Act or the rules or the conditions mentioned in the notification issued under sub-rule (10) or sub-rule (11) of rule 6AAD.
(3) The assessee shall not accept an amount exceeding the amount as approved in the notification from the beneficiary under the eligible agricultural extension project for training, education, guidance or any material distributed for the purposes of such training, education or guidance.
(4) The assessee shall not get any direct or indirect benefit from the notified agricultural extension project except the deduction of the eligible expenditure in accordance with the provisions of section 35 CCC of the Act, rule 6AAD and this rule.
(5) All expenses (not being expenditure in the nature of cost of any land or building), as reduced by the amount received from beneficiary, if any, incurred wholly and exclusively for undertaking an eligible agricultural extension project shall be eligible for deduction under section 35CCC :
Provided that any expenditure incurred on the agricultural extension project which is reimbursed or reimbursable to the assessee by any person, whether directly or indirectly, shall not be eligible for deduction under section 35CCC.
(6) The assessee shall, on or before the due date of furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139, furnish the following to the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, namely:—
(a) the audited statement of accounts of the agricultural extension projects for the previous year along with the audit report and amount of deduction claimed under sub-section (1) of section 35CCC;
(b) a note on the agricultural extension project undertaken by it during the previous year and the programme of agricultural extension project to be undertaken during the current year and the financial allocation for such programme; and
(c) a certificate from the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, regarding the genuineness of the agricultural extension project undertaken by the assessee during the previous year.
(7) If the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-tax, as the case may be, is satisfied that the,---
(a) assessee has not maintained separate books of account for the agricultural extension project or has not got such books of account audited by an accountant in accordance with sub-rule (1);
(b) assessee has not furnished the documents referred to in sub-rule (6);
(c) assessee has ceased to carry out activities of agricultural extension project;
(d) activities of agricultural extension project of the assessee are not genuine; or
(e) activities of the agricultural extension project are not being carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act or the rules or the conditions subject to which the notification was issued,
he may, after making appropriate inquires, furnish a report on the circumstances referred to in clause (a) to (e) to the CBDT for appropriate action as per the provisions of sub-rule (13) of rule 6AAD.".
3. In Appendix-II of the said rules, after Form No. 3CN, the following forms shall be inserted, namely:-
"FORM NO. 3C-O
[See rule 6AAD]
Application form for approval under sub-section (1) of section 35CCC of the Income-tax Act, 1961
1. (i) Name and address of the applicant.
(ii) Address of the principal place of business/ registered office of the assessee.
(iii) PAN of the assessee.
(iv) Date of incorporation of the company/ partnership firm/proprietary concern.
(v) Enclose a copy of the Memorandum, Articles of Association.
(vi) If the agricultural extension project of the company was notified earlier under sub-section(1) of section 35CCC, mention the notification number and date of the latest notification and furnish a copy of the same.
(vii) Nature of business
(viii) If notification issued under sub-section(1) of section 35CCC was rescinded in the past, mention reasons on account of which the notification was rescinded.
[Enclose a copy of the Order(s) rescinding notification(s)].
(ix) Date from which notification of agricultural extension project is requested for.
(x) Expected date of completion of project.
2. Purpose of the agricultural extension project(Give a brief write up on the requirement of agricultural extension project indicating the objectives of the project, stages of implementation, expected results and usefulness of the Project.)
3. Details of expenses (other than land or building) expected to be incurred for agricultural extension project.
4. Amount, if any, proposed to be charged from each beneficiary of agricultural extension project.
5. Agricultural extension projects undertaken by the applicant:
(i) agricultural extension projects undertaken by the assessee during last five years, if any along with their current status.
(ii) Details of agricultural extension projects which have been taken up in past and which are underway on the date of filing of application.
6. Whether the agricultural extension project approved by Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
(Enclose a copy of letter obtained from the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India)
7. Details of Return of Income filed for the last three Assessment years:
Assessment Year Turnover/Gross receipts Total Income Tax Payable as per return Tax Paid Assessed Income Details

8. Enclose copy of audited annual accounts of the assessee/accounts of the assessee for the last three years.
9. Whether any Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was levied on the assessee during the last five years and details thereof.
10. Whether any tax demand is outstanding on the date of filing application.
Certified that the above information is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Place Signature
Date Designation
Full Address
FORM NO.3CP
[See rule 6AAD]
Form for notification of agricultural extension project under sub-section (1) of section 35CCC of the Income-tax Act, 1961
1. Name, address and PAN of the applicant
2. Title of the agricultural extension project
3. Purpose of the agricultural extension project
4. Reference No. and date of the application
5. Date of commencement of the agricultural extension project
6. Duration of the agricultural extension project in months
7. Assessment year(s) for which the agricultural extension project is being notified (not exceeding three years)
8. Total expenses likely to be incurred for the agricultural extension project (other than cost of land or building)
9. Amount, if any, to be charged from each beneficiary of agricultural extension project
10. Conditions, if any, subject to which agricultural extension project is notified.
Place : (Signature)
Date : (Name and Designation)
Copy to :
(1) the applicant.
(2) Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
(3) Commissioner of Income-tax / Director of Income-tax.
(4) The Department of Agriculture of the concerned State.
(5) The Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) of the concerned District(s).".


--
Posted By Rajkumar to ITR at 5/31/2013 08:38:00 PM

__._,_.___


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Change in Tariff Value of Gold Notified



 
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise & Customs (CBEC), being satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do, hereby makes the following amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 36/2001-Customs (N.T.) dated, the 3rd August, 2001, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, Section-3, Sub-section (ii) vide number S. O. 748 (E), dated the 3rd August, 2001, namely:-
In the said notification, for TABLE-1 and TABLE-2, the following Tables shall be substituted namely:-
"TABLE-1
S. No.
Chapter/ heading/ sub-heading/tariff item
Description of goods
Tariff value US $
(Per Metric Tonne)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1
1511 10 00
Crude Palm Oil
843
2
1511 90 10
RBD Palm Oil
854
3
1511 90 90
Others – Palm Oil
849
4
1511 10 00
Crude Palmolein
860
5
1511 90 20
RBD Palmolein
863
6
1511 90 90
Others – Palmolein
862
7
1507 10 00
Crude Soyabean Oil
1075 (i.e. no change)
8
7404 00 22
Brass Scrap (all grades)
3859
9
1207 91 00
Poppy seeds
4395 (i.e. no change)
TABLE-2
S. No.
Chapter/ heading/ sub-heading/tariff item
Description of goods
Tariff value
(US $)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1
71 or 98
Gold, in any form in respect of which the benefit of entries at serial number 321 and 323 of the Notification No. 12/2012-Customs dated 17.03.2012 is availed
459 per 10 grams
2
71 or 98
Silver, in any form in respect of which the benefit of entries at serial number 322 and 324 of the Notification No. 12/2012-Customs dated 17.03.2012 is availed
737 per kilogram"
Regards
Prarthana Jalan


__._,_.___


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Business standard news updates 1-6-2013



Dell founder sued by investors


BLOOMBERG Houston/ Wilmington ( Delaware), 31 May

Dell Inc founder Michael Dell, the company's board and private- equity partners backing Dell's bid to take the computer maker private were sued in Texas by investors seeking to block the deal.

Shareholders, led by a private investor and the Mid- South Iron Workers Pension Fund, said the founder's $ 24.4- billion offer is underpriced when measured against Dell's recent stock buyback program and competing valuations proposed by major stakeholder Carl Icahn, according to the complaint filed yesterday in federal court in Houston.

"After his failed management choices led to significant losses for Dell and a resulting decrease in the company's stock price, defendant Michael Dell is now attempting to take advantage of the company's distressed stock price to buy the company on the cheap just as it is starting to experience a turnaround," John Michael Van Buiten, an investor who seeks to represent other shareholders in a class action, said in the complaint.

A similar complaint was filed in Delaware Chancery Court in February.

Dell and Silver Lake Management LLC's offer of $ 13.65 a share to take the company private represents a 27 per cent discount from the company's 2012 share price, rather than the 25 per cent premium CEO Michael Dell portrays it to be, according to the Texas complaint. Over the last two years, Dell has been aggressively repurchasing stock at an average price of $ 15.25 a share, the investors said.

The shareholders also claim the board violated its fiduciary duty by failing to solicit or consider competing bids that didn't allow Michael Dell to " gain a controlling stake in the company and remain as CEO".

Dell urges shareholders to vote for CEO's offer Dell Inc urged shareholders on Friday to vote for the $ 24.4- billion buyout offer led by founder and Chief Executive Michael Dell at a special meeting on July 18, saying the bid was superior to other strategic options.

Activist investor Carl Icahn and Southeastern Asset Management launched a $ 21- billion counter offer for Dell earlier this month that would allow shareholders to keep their shares.

Dells board said in a letter to shareholders that it had looked into the possibility of continuing with or modifying the PC makers business plan, changing its dividend policy, selling to a strategic buyer, and selling or

spinning off parts of the business. It did not mention the Icahn offer. REUTERS

 



--
 
CS A  RENGARAJAN,, B.Com ,FCS, LLB, PGDBM
Company Secretary, Chennai
CONVENOR, CHENNAI WEST STUDY CIRCLE ICSI-SIRC
email csarengarajan@gmail.com
mobile 093810 11200

CS Benevolent Fund is a collective effort towards extending the much needed financial support to the community of Company Secretaries in times of distress  Let us lend support and join for noble cause.



SHARING KNOWLEDGE SKY IS THE LIMIT

This mail and its attachments (if any) are confidential information intended for persons to whom the email is planned for delivery by the sender. If you have received this mail in error please notify the sender of the error by forwarding the email and its attachments (if any) and then deleting the mail received in error and the relevant email trail in this connection without making any copies or taking any prints.


__._,_.___


receive alert on mobile, subscribe to SMS Channel named "aaykarbhavan"
[COST FREE]
SEND "on aaykarbhavan" TO 9870807070 FROM YOUR MOBILE.

To receive the mails from this group send message to aaykarbhavan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___