Tuesday, June 30, 2015

[aaykarbhavan] Business STandard









??????????!!!!!!!






__._,_.___

Posted by: Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>


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





__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] SNK Newsletter June 2015 [1 Attachment]



 

Dear Sir / Madam,

                                                              

We are forwarding herewith a copy of Newsletter for the month of June, 2015.

 

Thanks & Regards,

 

SNK

snk@snkca.com

snk@youbroadband.in



__._,_.___
View attachments on the web

Posted by: snk <snk@snkca.com>


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





__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] CBDT Promotion Orders + Imp Verdicts On S. 40(a)(ia) TDS + S. 271(1)(c) Penalty + S. 269SS/271D + S. 43B Etc



Dear Subscriber,

CBDT Orders For Promotion Of CCsIT & DGsIT To Pr. CCIT & Posting Orders

The CBDT has vide Order No. 90 of 2015 dated 30.06.2015 ordered the promotion of several officers in the grade of Chief Commissioner / Director General of Income Tax to the post of Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. COT) in the Pay Scale of Rs. 80,000/- (Fixed) with effect from the date indicated against their names or assumption of charge of the post, whichever is later, and until further orders.

The CBDT has vide Order No. 91 of 2015 dated 30.06.2015 ordered the postings and additional charges of several officers in the grade of Chief Commissioner of Income-tax with immediate effect and until further orders.


P.M.S Diesels vs. CIT (P&H High Court)

S. 40(a)(ia): Argument that the disallowance for want of TDS can be made only for amounts "payable" as of 31st March and not for those already "paid" is not correct. In Liminie dismissal of SLP in Vector Shipping does not mean Supreme Court has confirmed the view of the HC. However, ITAT to consider whether payees have already paid tax

The argument that section 40(a)(ia) applies only to amounts which are "payable" and not to amounts that are already "paid" is also not acceptable (Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Crescent Export Syndicate (2013) 216 Taxman 258 (Cal) and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sikandar Khan N. Tunwar (2013) 357 ITR 312 (Guj) followed)


KPC Medical College & Hospital vs. DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

S. 271(1)(c): Law on levy of penalty in a case where satisfaction is recorded in s. 153C/153D assessments by AO who is common to the searched party and the assessee explained

The attempt at the end of the assessee is that there should be a straight jacket system, whereby the satisfaction recorded even by the same AO then, that should be placed in the file of searched person and if it is placed in some other cupboard in his room by the AO then, there cannot be any satisfaction, we fail to appreciate that technical approach at the end of the assessee. The law does not require the manner and the procedure of keeping the files. The section only requires that a satisfaction be recorded and it should be during the period propounded by Hon'ble S.C. in CIT vs. Calcutta Knitwears 362 ITR 673


CIT vs. Mahagun Technologies Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

S. 271D: Section 269SS does not apply to non-monetary book entry transactions of loans and advances

Section 269SS indicates that it applies to a transaction where a deposit or a loan is accepted by an assessee, otherwise than by an account payee cheque or an account payee draft. The ambit of the Section is clearly restricted to transaction involving acceptance of money and not intended to affect cases where a debit or a liability arises on account of book entries


ITO vs. Pandit Vijay Kant Sharma (ITAT Delhi)

S. 275(1)(a): Law on time limit for passing penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) explained. Challenge by assessee to validity of penalty order entertained in Dept's appeal despite lack of C. O. /cross-appeal by assessee

On a combined reading of Section 275(1)(a) along with its proviso it becomes clear that main section 275(1)(a) talks of a period of six months from the date on which the order is received by commissioner and main section also talks of orders passed by commissioner appeals as well as by tribunal talk whereas the proviso which is applicable from 01.06.2003 talks about orders passed by Commissioner Appeals only and here, the period of limitation for passing penalty order is one year from the date Commissioner receives Tribunal order


ITO vs. Shubhashri Panicker (ITAT Jaipur)

S. 282: The postal authorities are the agent of the recipient. There is a presumption that handing over notice to the postal department means that it has been served on the assessee

Since the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act has not been received back unserved within thirty days of its issuance, there would be presumption under the law that notice has been duly served upon the assessee. The notice was under transmission by handing over to the postal authority who acted as an agent of the recipient.


DCIT vs. Jyoti Ltd (ITAT Ahmedabad)

S. 43B(e): Conversion of outstanding interest into a loan does not constitute "actual payment" of the interest so as to qualify for deduction

On perusing Section 43B(e), it is seen that interest on any loan or advance from a schedule bank, in accordance with terms and conditions of the agreement governing such loans or advance, would be allowed as deduction in the previous year in which sum is actually paid by the Assessee


Regards,

 

Editor,

 

itatonline.org

---------------------

Latest:

DCIT vs. Vodafone Essar Gujarat Limited (Gujarat High Court)

S. 254(2A) third proviso cannot be interpreted to mean that extension of stay of demand should be denied beyond 365 days even when the assesseee is not at fault. ITAT should make efforts to decide stay granted appeals expeditiously



__._,_.___

Posted by: "editor@itatonline.org" <itatonline.org@gmail.com>


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





__,_._,___

Monday, June 29, 2015

[aaykarbhavan] Business Standard
















__._,_.___

Posted by: Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>


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





__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Re: {Amresh's CA's} ARE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REALLY INDEPENDENT? CA AMRESH VASHISHT



Enlightening subject and thought provoking article for all...
Keep it up.
Shah D J




On Monday, 29 June 2015 12:48 PM, "CA Amresh Vashisht caamreshvashisht@gmail.com [ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA]" <ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


 
ARE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS REALLY INDEPENDENT? CA AMRESH VASHISHT
 
Our profession did not anticipate much of what has happened after Satyam, which has sufficiently concerned about the growing loss of credibility of the profession. Everyone is talking about the role and responsibility of Auditors. Company law and income tax are the two main resource legislation, which decide the fate of the profession, but now both the legislation are looking towards the profession with red eyes. The latest income tax amendments in section 288 regulate the appearance by "authorized representatives" before any income-tax authority or the Appellate Tribunal. Sub-clause (viii) of the Explanation of section 288(2), as amended by the Finance Act 2015, provides that a chartered accountant is eligible to be an "authorized representative" subject to many terms and conditions. No opportunity is being lost by the legislation to cover the profession of Chartered Accountancy.

Auditors Independence is the talk of the town. More and more statements, quotes, books, guidelines shall thrust upon the definition of the independent auditor. Every stakeholder knows that selecting an independent auditor that meets a company's expectations and needs are paramount to effective corporate governance, effective Tax management and effective political governance. Many talk about the independent auditor and look towards independent auditor with a great hope that such auditors would act with due diligence and care without compromising independence. The latest amendments clearly show a way to the profession that an auditor who is not independent cannot meaningfully discharge his functions of protecting the interest of revenue by remaining fair. There is no problem of concept of Independent auditor with the auditor fraternity. They are very much ready to deliver and fulfill the expectations of the stakeholders.
 
Is it justified that new 51 a rule states that if an auditor has contributed more than Rs 50000/- to a charitable institution, he can't represent the charitable institution before the Income Tax Authorities. Now in the eyes of law, he shall lose his independence as he is a substantial contributor to that charitable institution. Though the reality is just an opposite of it, If a Chartered accountant gives a donation of Rs. 50000/- and thereafter if he represents the case, HE will be more vigilant and will see towards the accounts, taxation, the conduct of the institution with more open eyes. One more coincidence which may take place is that that if an auditor cum tax consultant find the working of any charitable institution impressive but he can't be a contributor of Rs. 50000/- towards the charity because it will lose his tax consultancy.
Now it has been taken as granted that if the auditor is a related person, the independence, authenticity and bona fide of such Audit Report shall be compromised. An auditor is expected to discharge his duties with full independence and without compromising the interest of revenue. In the absence of reliability of an audit report signed by interested /related person, not only the reliability of the report suffers but may also aid in tax evasion.
All the Chartered Accountants, if true to their calling, have the independent outlook and the high standards of performance attributed to them as professionals. Many courts have given due respect to the audit report and have held that without having any positive material on record, audit report submitted by the Accountant cannot be disregarded. The authenticity of books of accounts is accepted on the basis of audit reports. Reference may be made to the decisions in CIT v. Regional Kisan Gramin Bank (2014) 42 taxmann.com 578 (Allahabad); CIT v. U.P. State Food & Essential Commodities (2013) 39 taxmann.com 106 (Allahabad); Madanani Construction Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 45 (Gau).
 
Are Chartered Accountants really independent? All stakeholders recognize chartered accountants as independent who are not in fact independent. Our profession is under intense congressional scrutiny by the latest amendments. The amendments in Company law 2013 and Finance Act 2015 are heading towards a single object to achieve independence and integrity of the auditor.  The process of appointing, assessing, and compensating the independent auditor is an important activity. It is the independent auditor's responsibility to perform a high-quality audit.
But the foremost point is the appointing procedure. No one talks about this. No literature is available where the appointment procedure has been considered as a vital element to achieve auditors independent. In present circumstances there is 100% failure in the appointing procedure of the professional opportunities. The profession is directly in line of fire because the appointing procedure of the auditor is not leading the profession into right direction nor the profession will ever achieve the independent auditor.
The appointment procedure is the mother of the independent auditor. How can an independent auditor be born without a mother? It's not possible so when we shout about achieving Auditors Independence, are we making fools of everyone? Yes, as long as we shall not deal with the appointing mechanism in all kinds of auditors, it's wrong to admit being complied with auditor independence.
Independence refers to the mental attitude of a Chartered Accountant in approaching a task. It deals with the actual and the perceived ability to act with integrity and objectivity. The appearance of an independent mental attitude is as important to an auditor as the attitude itself. To us, mental attitude is primary and our appearance secondary. So a mental attitude constitutes the whole of independence. An auditor which is being appointed to the task is by a feeding hand and if he decides to bite a feeding hand, then only he is honest, objective and of independent behavior. Everyone thinks the concept of independent is vital to successful audit practice, then why the allotment or appointment procedures are being taken up in a casual approach.
There are approx 50000 Chartered Accountant firms out of which 40000 are in real time practice. Is it difficult to regulate the 40000 firms with the centralized allotment procedure? In a country , where we are heading towards 1.25 billion aadhar cards digitally attached to their banking accounts and operating it to reimburse the few hundred rupees of subsidy in their account by auto route. Can't this country regulate and allot the audits to these 40000 firms through a transparent way. Each and every audit allotment is defective and unfair.
The attacks are many. The government is ready with the weapons of mass destruction. Here mass destruction is for the poor accounting professionals. They are ready to hit the auditors. The protection, management which is in the hands of our regulator ICAI has totally failed to raise its voice against the deliberate attempts on the Chartered accountants. Likewise, our government is fully ready to take on its enemy with the strength of their weapons; we see the following threats to our professional practice.
APPOINTMENT OF AUDITOR THROUGH TENDERING.
1.     1. SURYA is Intercontinental-range Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) with a range of 8000-12000 KM is under development stage. In our profession, we have a tendering process to kill our independence. The tenders are being floated with their own wish list of terms and conditions. The accounting professionals are not able to cope with the tender invitation and are seeking it as low as Re 1 per audit. This tendering process shall have the same effect as Surya shall have in the enemy camp.
APPOINTMENT OF STATUTORY CENTRAL AUDITOR BY CHOICE.
2.      AGNI- VI is a Submarine-launched with an intercontinental - range (probable MIRV) having a range of 6000 to 8000 KM is under development stage. In our profession, now we are having a system of autonomy for Central auditor's appointment in the case of PSU banks. The chairman/ Boards/ Audit Committee is free to choose any of the eligible audit firms as Central auditors of the bank, It's in the hands of those you are at the helm of affairs that they can choose anyone of their choice. This procedure shall have the same deadly effect on the enemy as of Agni VI.
APPOINTMENT OF CORPORATE AUDITOR BY CHOICE
 
3.     AGNI-V, Intermediate to Intercontinental-range Tested successfully for 5000 to 8000 KM.In our profession, the corporate auditors are being appointed by the shareholders of the company. Technically, this is the big lie. The management decides the auditor take its auditor's eligibility letter to act as an auditor and then take the name to the meeting of the shareholders and get them approved. This appointment is also an accommodating appointment because there is nothing which suggests that the appointment is an independent one. It's in the hands of those you are at the helm of affairs in the capacity of the board of Directors as they can choose anyone of their choice. This procedure shall have the same deadly effect on the enemy as of Agni V.
APPOINTMENT OF STATUTORY BRANCH AUDITOR BY BANK STAFF.
4.     AGNI-IV, Intermediate-range Tested successfully for 4000 KM. In our profession, the branch auditors are being appointed by the staff of the concerned bank. The staff gets a voluminous list of auditors from RBI and selects the auditor at their choice. Members at large approach them to get the allotment of audits. This appointment is also an accommodating appointment as being begged by auditors and there is nothing which suggests that the appointment is an independent one. It's in the hands of those you are at the helm of affairs at the lower capacity as they can choose anyone of their choice. This procedure shall have the same deadly effect on the enemy as of Agni IV.
 
APPOINTMENT OF CONCURRENT AUDITOR BY BANK STAFF.
5.     AGNI –III Intermediate range 3500 to 5000 KM deployed to safeguard the territories of the country. In our profession, the concurrent auditors are being appointed by the staff of the concerned bank for favour, for money and for other interests. This is going on uninterrupted for the last 60 years. No challenge from the regulator which is a mute spectator to this on going wrong practice. This appointment is also an accommodating appointment as being unethically obtained by auditors and there is nothing which suggests that the appointment is an independent one. It's in the hands of those you are at the helm of affairs at the lower capacity as they can choose anyone at their sweet will. This procedure shall have the same deadly effect on the enemy as of Agni III.
 
APPOINTMENT OF AUDITOR BY RRB.
6.      AGNI –II, Medium Range 2000 to 3000 KM, deployed. In our profession, the auditors are being appointed by the management of the concerned bank. They allot the 15 branches to one auditor from a list received from NABARD. They give the 3 days to complete the assignment. If anyone raises some reservation or questioned the procedure they qualify them for termination. They appoint the new one and get it signed at a prescribed time by hook or crook. This appointment is also an accommodating appointment as being shorter completion period and there is nothing which suggests that the appointment is an independent one. This procedure shall have the same deadly effect on the enemy as of Agni II.
APPOINTMENT OF AUDIORS BY A PARTNERSHIP OR SOLE PROPRIETOR FIRM.
7.     AGNI  –I short to medium range 700-1250 KM, deployed and ever ready to protect the country. In our profession, the auditor is having formal and informal contacts which give the referrals, he is associated with the various social networks, the old clients introduce there known people to the auditors and above all the relative place an important role in establishing a practice and appointments to the small enterprises. This appointment is also an accommodating appointment as being appointed by referrals and there is nothing which suggests that the appointment is an independent one. This procedure shall have the same deadly effect on the enemy as of Agni I.
APPOINTMENT OF AUDIORS BY C & AG.
8.     This is the only audit, which gives independence to auditors. The appointment comes through auto route based on the well established open calculation of weight age of seniority, the term of term establishment, association with the firm, the test of genuinely with the compensatory figures from the firm and were appointed by an independent authority i.e C&AG. Yes, here the auditor appointment is an independent one.
It is not uncommon these days to hear expressions of grave concern within our profession about loosing its shine, compromises with unethical acts and a general decline in intra profession courtesy. At the same time, We Chartered accountants are being surfaced in every stringent amendment. We are being addressed as irresponsible in dealing with the economic affairs of the country. These concerns have led some to worry that our professionalism is either dead or teetering on the brink of extinction. At least this phenomenon is true for the sole proprietors or small firms operating across the country because of being shunted out from the professional opportunities. Weapons details @ Wikipedia.
 


--

Thanks & Regards
,   
 
CA AMRESH VASHISHT, FCA, LLB, DISA (ICAI)
Member,ICAI- Regional Research Committee 2013-14
Member,ICAI- Committee For DIRECT TAXES 2011-12

1 1 5, Chappel Street, Meerut Cantt, UP, INDIA.
 Phone: 0 1 2 1-2 6 6 1 9 4 6. Cell: 9 8 3 7 5 1 5 4 3 2.
 http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA




__._,_.___

Posted by: Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>


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





__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Re: {Amresh's CA's} Re: {Amresh's CA's} Proposal for Partnership / Merger



I believe that one should go to the details of Partnership firm to whom they are going to be attached from other partners with the firm.
There are some firms who are be fooling the incoming partners.
I had seen with one a senior partner in one Ahmedabad firm. Wherein Partner was left for Profit , year end only Rs 5000 only?
Firm was having more than 10,00,000 and more income some 40 years back? This is just caution. One should not be prompted by big name or so!!!!
Regards,
Shah D J



On Monday, 29 June 2015 11:44 AM, "Arun Tibrewal rkl_arunkt@yahoo.co.in [ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA]" <ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


 
WE ARE HAVING TWO PARTNER FIRM AT ROURKELA
IN ODISHA.IF INTERESTED PL CALL ME.I AM RIGHT NOW AT DELHI
AND CAN DISCUSS FACE TO FACE.
 
Thanking You,
 
Rtn CA A. K. Tibrewal
Chartered Accountant
Kachery Road, Rourkela - 12 (Odisha)
Mob: +91-9437044500
www.aktibrewal.com


From: "ca.gksureka@gmail.com [ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA]" <ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA@yahoogroups.com>
To: ICAI_CIRC_MEERUT_CA@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 28 June 2015 8:23 AM
Subject: {Amresh's CA's} Proposal for Partnership / Merger

 
Dear friends,
 
Our's is a well-established CA firm (RBI Category-I & CAG Empanelled) having HQ at Delhi & have branches at Mumbai, Chennai, Ranchi & Muzaffarpur (Bihar) with a team of 6 full time partners (all FCAs). We invite suitable partnership / merger proposals from individuals & proprietorship / partnership firms to hit big assignments; DISA is an added advantage. 
 
Presently we are looking for proposals from other states (preferably state capital or next prominent cities). Kindly send your proposal by email to gks@gksureka.com only.
 
Warm regards,
 
ca gokul sureka
Managing Partner
G.K.Sureka & Co.
Corporate Office: New Delhi
T: +91-9811077186, 41117217 (Direct)
EPABX: +91-11-41117200(30 Lines), Fax: +91-11-41117201







__._,_.___

Posted by: Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>


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





__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Re: [Thane CAs] Re: Income Tax Returns & Tax Audit for AY 2015-16



The question is answered in question only. When we shout for ITR is not uploaded , or very late. It is obvious that those who are ready  with all details he may file at any time in April of May June or so. I had seen one person , when end of Samvat year on the other day Kartak Sud Ekam first day of next year , his accottns were ready???!!
Regards,
Shah D J




On Monday, June 29, 2015 6:00 AM, "t sankar sankarfca@yahoo.co.uk [ThaneCAs]" <ThaneCAs@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


 
if the returns are available on 01st April, how many returns will be filed between 01st April and 31st May?  How many returns have you filed in the April previously?


Dear Friends,







Income Tax Returns like ITR-4, ITR-5, ITR-7, ITR-6 etc for AY 2015-16 is not yet notified. E-filing of notified I. T. Returns are not enabled on the website. June-2015 is about to over. In my view such scenario is highly undesirable. Relevant Income Tax Returns must be notified before 1st April of the relevant AY and E-filing  mechanism must commence on 1st April. Income Tax Department is compelling or restraining Tax payers from complying with their statutory obligations. If an assessee wishes to file his Income Tax Return in the month of say April, he shall be able to do so. In case the Returns are not notified or E-filing not enabled, the tax payer shall have option to file his Return in old form. We can understand the purpose of notifying Income Tax Return valid only for a particular AY, but donot understand why they are not ready till 1st April?


To my surprise even Tax Audit Report E-filing is also not yet enabled? I fail to understand the reason. Form 3CA, 3CB & 3CD are not year specific. TAR e-filing mechanism must be available. Sheer wastage of valuable time of Tax payers of India due to inefficient bureaucrats.


I seek your valuable views.




__._,_.___

Posted by: Dipakkumar Shah <cadjshah@yahoo.com>


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





__,_._,___

[aaykarbhavan] Judgments and Infomration , C L I G S T R ,






HDFC Bank breaches limit on RIL's loans; Rajan didn't imply world facing new Great Depression: RBI

HDFC Bank breaches limit on RIL's loans; Rajan didn't imply world facing new Great Depression: RBI 


CLI
www.cliofindia.com
info@cliofindia.com

GOODS AND SERVICE TAX REPORTS (GSTR) HIGHLIGHTS


ISSUE DATED 29.6.2015

Volume 33 Part 1


SUPREME COURT


F Order of single judge at pre-deposit stage will not act as res judicata on merits : Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. v. Dy. CCE p. 1



F Authorities not empowered to dispense with show-cause notice on presumption that no prejudice would be caused to assessee : Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. v. Dy. CCE p. 1




HIGH COURT


F Where return of goods genuine transaction and return intimated to Department, Appellate Tribunal justified in setting aside order of confiscation, imposition of fine and penalty : CCE v. Vidhya Packaging Industries P. Ltd. (All) p. 26


F Determination of annual production capacity : Competent authority to determine application of rule 5 of 1997 Rules in light of Supreme Court's decision : CCE v. Kanishk Steel Industries Ltd. (Mad) p. 28

F EXIM Policy enabling Customs authorities to exercise powers for confiscation or to impose fine and penalty without prejudice to action under 1962 Act, finding of Appellate Tribunal that no penalty leviable, erroneous : Commissioner of Customs v. Pattu Exports P. Ltd. (Mad) p. 38

F Assessee producing statutory document in proof of bona fide default, matter to be reconsidered by adjudicating authority : Commissioner of Customs v. Pattu Exports P. Ltd. (Mad) p. 38

F High Court not to review factual findings based on evidence but only to correct order where based on irrelevant and incorrect construction of facts based on misappreciation of law or non-application of mind : M. P. Goenka v. Commissioner of Customs (Delhi) p. 62

F Acquittal in criminal proceedings cannot ipso facto to result in setting aside of order of confiscation : K. V. Rajagopal (Deceased) v. Commissioner of Customs (Mad) p. 73





CESTAT ORDERS


F Sludge and pulper waste emerging during manufacture of paper not waste and scrap of paper or paperboard and not excisable goods : Magnum Ventures Ltd. v. CCE (Trib.-Delhi) p. 50


F Where Department establishing illegal import and link of goods with importers, retraction of confessional statement need not be dealt with : M. P. Goenka v. Commissioner of Customs (Trib.-Delhi) p. 57






STATUTES AND NOTIFICATIONS



F Rules :
Cenvat Credit (Second Amendment) Rules, 2015 p. 1

Cenvat Credit (Third Amendment) Rules, 2015 p. 2

Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Amendment Rules, 2015 p. 2

Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) (Amendment) Rules, 2015 p. 5

F Notifications :
Customs Act, 1962 : Notification under section 25(1) : Effective rates of basic duties for specified goods : Amendments p. 11

Exemption to specified goods imported for defence and internal security force : Amendments p. 9

Exemption to specified goods imported into India : Amendments p. 13

Notification under section 50 : Shipping Bill (Electronic Declaration) Regulations, 2011 : Amendments p. 8

Customs Tariff Act, 1975 : Notification under section 3(3) : Levy of additional duty : Amendments p. 13

Notification under section 9A(1) and (5) : Anti-dumping duty on import of sodium citrate from China p. 15





COMPANY LAW INSTITUTE OF INDIA PVT. LTD.
No. 2, Vaithyaram Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017.
Phone: (044) 24350752 - 55
Fax: (044) 24322015
info@cliofindia.com


Chief Justice Shri. Mahesh Mittal Kumar takes over charge as CLB, Chairman

Chief Justice Shri. Mahesh Mittal Kumar takes over charge as Chairman, Company Law Board on June 5, 2015: CLB

Click here to read more.

Cos. (Share Capital & Debentures) Second Amendment Rules, 2015 published in Official Gazette

Companies (Share Capital and Debentures) Second Amendment Rules, 2015 published in Official Gazette; Mandatory seal of  company on share certificates done away with.

Click here to read more.

Cos. (Registration of Charges) Amendment Rules, 2015 published in Official Gazette

Companies (Registration of Charges) Amendment Rules, 2015 published in Official Gazette; Mandatory requirement of affixation of company's seal for verification of instrument consisting of property situated outside India is made optional.

Click here to read more.

Cos. (Declaration & Payment of Dividend) Second Amendment Rules, 2015 published in Official Gazette

Companies (Declaration & Payment of Dividend) Second Amendment Rules, 2015 published in Official Gazette, whereby a company which has not set off the carried over losses and depreciation not provided in previous year against company's current year profit, can declare dividend

Click here to read more.

CLB, Chennai Bench to hear all matters pertaining to Andhra Pradesh & Telangana

Bench Officers, CLB, Chennai Bench directed to move all matters (including urgent mentioning) pertaining to State of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana before CLB, Chennai Bench for hearing: CLB

Click here to read more.

Cabinet approves proposal for converting Solar Energy Corporation into Sec. 3 Co.

Union Cabinet approves proposal for permitting Solar Energy Corporation of India ('SECI') to apply to the Registrar of Companies for converting it into Section 3 Co. under Companies Act, 2013 and renaming it as Renewable Energy Corporation of India ('RECI'); Govt. explains objective behind move, says SECI will become self-sustaining & self-generating organization, will engage itself in owning solar power plants generating & selling power and in other segments of solar sector activities and will take up development of all segments of renewable energy; States that the Govt. has decided to enlarge the scope of the SECI's activities for providing comprehensive and optimized solution for generation of renewable energy integrating various renewable energy sources: PIB

Click here to read more.

Govt approves 16 FDI proposals worth over Rs. 6750 cr

Based on FIPB's recommendation, the Govt. approves 16 FDI proposals amounting to Rs. 6750.86 crore approximately, involving applicants from pharma, telecom, real estate, print media, telecom & broadcasting sectors. 

Click here to read more.

Share trading through screen-based mechanism no defence for concerted action, imposes penalty

SEBI imposes a penalty of Rs 5.73 cr on 14 entities ('noticees', including individuals & HUFs) for their fraudulent & manipulative trading in 4 scrips on 4 different trading date in cash segment affecting scrips' closing price in moments, thereby violating SEBI (Prevention of Fraudulent & Unfair Trade Practices) Regulation; Observes that noticees' trading activity was concerted, as they belonged to same family & trading strategy was common in all four scrips, i.e., trading in closing hours, placing orders above last traded price, thereby impacting the closing price in cash segments and subsequently exercising call options in derivative segment; Rejects noticees' contention that sale of shares took place through screen based mechanism of stock exchange wherein it was not possible to know the counter party broker / client, holds that "a trade can be executed on the screen and still be manipulative in nature"; Further rejects noticees' contention that they were financially independent and had traded independently, observes that though direct evidence may not be available, inter se transfer of shares resulting in no change of beneficial ownership reveals that there was meeting of minds; Relies on SAT rulings in Nirmal Bang Securities (P) Ltd. vs SEBI and Ketan Parekh Vs. SEBI:SEBI

 
The ruling was delivered by Shri. A. Sunil Kumar.


HUF, though not director, deemed "person-acting-in-concert", liable for Takeover Code compliance

SAT upholds SEBI order imposing Rs 8 lakhs penalty on persons​-​acting​-​in​-​concert ('PAC') for not making disclosures about acquisition of shares of target co. above the threshold limit; Rejects appellant's contention that since it was an HUF, it wasn't a director of the acquirer co., thus, it could not be held as PAC, and no penalty could be levied on it; Holds that since the director (who was the karta of HUF) in his individual capacity decided to acquire shares of target co. in the name of HUF and in his capacity as a director decided along with other directors.. "it is evident that there was a common intention between the parties to acquire the shares of the target company...", thus, it was a deemed PAC; Referring to Regulation 2(1)(q)(2) of SAST Regulations, 2011, holds that where shares of target co. are acquired by company, its directors and person associated with their director, they would squarely fall within category of 'deemed persons acting in concert', thus HUF was deemed PAC; Rejects appellant's contention that no penalty was imposable as no unfair advantage had accrued to it and no loss was caused to investors on account of non disclosure, holds that, "liability to pay penalty for failure to make disclosure is not dependent on the question as to whether or not unfair advantage has accrued or loss is caused to the investors or not.":SAT

The ruling was delivered by Justice J.P. Devadhar and Shri. Jog Singh.
 
Advocate Dakshesh Vyas argued on behalf of the appellants, while Advocates Kumar Desai and Manish Acharya argued on behalf of the respondent.



__._,_.___

Posted by: Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>


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





__,_._,___