Welcome to CS Students' Online Club. Our MISSION: "To create a online network of budding governance professionals". Our VISION: "To be a leading network of governance professionals, providing scope for knowledge and career development".

CSoC Members Count:
38,252
Latest topics
» Past Question Papers of CS Executive / Professional / Foundation Exam Upto December 2016 Session
Wed 1 Feb 2017 - 0:11 by rchgiri

» Direct & Indirect Tax Laws Updates & Select Cases for CS Executive/Professional December 2016 Examination
Wed 11 Jan 2017 - 16:59 by rchgiri

» Financial Treasury and Forex Management>Past Questions of 60 marks>CS Professional
Thu 5 Jan 2017 - 9:45 by rchgiri

» CS EP NS P2 Cost & Management Accounting > MCQ
Sat 8 Oct 2016 - 17:57 by rchgiri

» CS Professional / Executive Programme Guideline Answers upto June 2016 Exam
Sun 28 Aug 2016 - 16:49 by rchgiri

» Tips on "How To Face An Interview & Career Planning"
Tue 23 Aug 2016 - 9:55 by rchgiri

» SEBI Act, Rules, Regulations, etc.
Mon 1 Aug 2016 - 14:48 by rchgiri

» CS Dinesh Chandra Arora, New Secretary of ICSI
Thu 21 Jul 2016 - 15:34 by Club CEO

» Online Learning of CS Executive coaching classes
Wed 11 May 2016 - 23:11 by raviesm

» Service tax Reverse Charge Mechanism.
Mon 15 Feb 2016 - 21:51 by siva004

» Service tax credit on step ladder repair
Mon 15 Feb 2016 - 21:37 by siva004

» CS Mamta Binani elected as New President of ICSI & CS Shyam Agarwal elected as New Vice-President of ICSI for 2015-16
Tue 19 Jan 2016 - 12:08 by Club CEO

» CS PP Old Syllabus: P4: CRI: Questions & Answers >> Correct or Incorrect:
Sun 13 Dec 2015 - 20:28 by rchgiri

» The Companies Act, 2013: The Rules made thereunder, Circulars & Notifications Issued by MCA
Sat 5 Dec 2015 - 12:42 by rchgiri

» New CSoC Face Portal
Thu 8 Oct 2015 - 9:01 by Club CEO

» CS Trainees / Jobs
Wed 23 Sep 2015 - 14:36 by rchgiri

» General Notice to Club Members & Well-Wishers
Tue 8 Sep 2015 - 15:36 by Club CEO

» online coaching for cs professional old syllabus
Sun 6 Sep 2015 - 13:41 by rchgiri

» Automatic Switchover To Professional (New Syllabus 2012) From December, 2016 Session
Thu 3 Sep 2015 - 15:49 by rchgiri

» Can anybody tell Main object clause for Manufacture of machinery of Polyurethanes industry.
Wed 2 Sep 2015 - 14:59 by parul5986

Top posters
rchgiri (1527)
 
Club CEO (1158)
 
praveen999 (691)
 
Soundharya (591)
 
mione (424)
 
lalitha.purohit (283)
 
j.padiya (277)
 
Preetpal Singh (219)
 
Aswathy (193)
 
SANJAY SHARMA (176)
 


You are not connected. Please login or register

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 4]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Please find the following links of ICAI which are helpful for the students who are appearing for CS Executive/Professional December 2016 Examinations.

(A) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for CA Direct Tax Laws Supplementary Study Materials as amended by Finance Act 2015 [Relevant for May 2016 and November 2016 examinations]

(B) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] & [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for CA Indirect Tax Laws Supplementary Study Materials as amended by Finance Act 2015 [Relevant for May 2016 and November 2016 examinations]

&

(C) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for Select Cases of Direct Tax Laws & Indirect Tax Laws [Relevant for CA May 2016 and CA November 2016 examinations]

published by The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

Have a happy Exam Preparation.



Last edited by rchgiri on Sun 3 Jul 2016 - 22:25; edited 16 times in total (Reason for editing : As amened as per Finance Act 2015)

j.padiya

avatar
CSoC Well-Wisher
CSoC Well-Wisher
thank u sir,
agree with u sir,
icsi will publish it on the site after so many req. mails or in the last month of exam lolzz.....
good day

K L Pallavi



Hi Sir,

Thank you very much for your valuable information

regards

Pallavi
rchgiri wrote:Dear Friends,

Please find the link [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for Case laws relevant for CA Nov, 2012 Examinations published by The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

The same "Direct & Indirect Tax Case laws" is equally helpful for the students who are appearing for CS Executive/Professional Dec 2012 Examinations.

Have a nice day.

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Dear Friends,

Please find the following link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for "Free Book on New System of Taxation of Services by CA Rajkumar S. Adukia"

Have a nice day.

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

Please find the link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for Tax Laws Updates for Executive Programme June 2013 Examination

Wish you all the best for next CS Exam.

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

Please find the link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for Advance Tax Laws and Practice Updates for June 2013 CS Professional Exam from ICSI

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Please find the link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for Tax Laws Updates for December 2013 CS Executive Exam from ICSI

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Please find the link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

for Advanced Tax Laws and Practice Updates for December 2013 CS Professional Exam from ICSI

9 update for executive new course on Tue 3 Dec 2013 - 21:00

milap


required updates for tax laws for executive new course...pls if any one can help me

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Dear Milap,

These links are applicable for tax laws new course too.

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Dear All,

To have better knowledge and to secure good marks in CS/CA/CMA Examinations, please refer to last 5 Finance Acts, namely Finance Act 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012.

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

Inter-corporate deposits (“ICDs”) are not “loans and advances” and are not assessable to tax as “deemed dividend”

as decided in M/s. IFB Agro Industries Ltd. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, I.T.A No. 1721/Kol/2012, Date of Order : 19.12.2013, ITAT-Kolkata


S. 2(22)(e) refers to ‘loans’ and ‘advances’ and does not refer to a ‘deposit’. The fact that the term ‘deposit’ does not mean a ‘loan’ and that the two terms are two different & distinct terms is evident from the Explanation to S. 269T and S. 269SS of the Act where both the terms are used. Further, the second proviso to S. 269SS recognises the term ‘loan’ taken or ‘deposit’ accepted. Once it is accepted that the terms ‘loan’ and ‘deposit’ are two distinct terms which have distinct meaning then if only the term ‘loan’ is used in a particular section the ‘deposit’ received by an assessee cannot be treated as a ‘loan’ for that section. The Companies Act, 1956 also makes a distinction between a “loan” and a “deposit” in s. 58A, 269 & 370. The distinction between a “loan” and a “deposit” is that in the case of a “loan”, the needy person approaches the lender for obtaining the loan. The loan is lent at the terms stated by the lender. In the case of a “deposit”, the depositor goes to the depositee for investing his money primarily with the intention of earning interest. Also, s. 2(22)(e) enacts a deeming fiction and cannot be given a wider meaning than what it purports to cover. It has to be interpreted strictly. Thus, the view of the AO & CIT(A) that an Inter-corporate deposit is similar to a loan is not correct.

Please find the link for details.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

S. 11: Law on taxability of voluntary donations as “anonymous donations” u/s 115BBC or as “cash credit” u/s 68 in hands of charitable trust explained

as decided in Sunder Deep Educational Society vs. Addl CIT, ITA No. 2428/Del/2011, Date of Order : 06.12.2013, ITAT-Delhi.

The assessee, a charitable institution, received donations of Rs. 3.55 crore. It maintained a record indicating the name and address of the donors. It claimed that the said donations had been applied for charitable purposes as per s. 11 and nothing was assessable. The AO conducted a test check by sending letters to the donors. To the extent of donations aggregating Rs. 1.96 crore, the letters came back undelivered or were not replied to. The AO held that as the confirmations were not received, the said donations were “anonymous donations” and assessable to tax u/s 115BBC. He held that alternatively, the said sum was assessable as a “cash credit” u/s 68 as the identity, genuineness and credit worthiness of the alleged donors was not proved.On further appeal by the assessee to the Tribunal HELD allowing the appeal:

(i) S. 115BBC which assesses “anonymous donations” does not apply because the assessee has maintained a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making the contribution;

(ii) S. 68 seeks to assess cash credits as income. However, when the non-corpus voluntary donations are already disclosed as income and applied for charitable purposes, s. 68 has no application. The fact that the complete list of donors was not filed and the donors were not produced does not mean that the assessee was seeking to introduce unaccounted money into the trust;

Please find the link for details.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

S. 41(1): Liability outstanding for long period of time is assessable as income (despite no write-back in A/cs) if assessee is unable to prove genuineness of liability

as decided in Income Tax Department vs. Shri Shailesh D. Shah, ITA No.7012/M/10, Date of Order: 11.12.2013, ITAT-Mumbai

It is very improbable that payments to labour can remain outstanding for more than three years. The assessee has not been able to produce the records relating to the name, addresses and bills of the labour etc to prove that the liability continues to exist. It is accordingly a case of cessation of liability. The view that such sums shown as liability is assessable to tax is sanctioned by Chipsoft Technology where the view was taken that it would be illogical to say that a debtor or an employer, holding on to unpaid dues, should be given the benefit of his showing the amount as a liability, even though he would be entitled in law to say that a claim for its recovery is time barred, and continue to enjoy the amount. This view is not contrary to the view taken in Vardhaman Overseas Ltd where the law was laid down that s. 41(1) does not apply if the amount of liability is not written back in the accounts. If both judgements are read in harmony, it can be observed that the assessee cannot be allowed to show an amount as a liability even though he has no intention to pay it back but to enjoy the same for an unlimited period without being added to his income only on the excuse that he has not written off the same in his books of accounts. However, if the facts of the case establish that the liability has been genuinely shown by the assessee and his subsequent conduct shows that he has paid back the said credits and his intention was not to enjoy the amount for unlimited period without any intention to pay back the same, then it cannot be said to be a case of cessation of liability.

Please click the following link to view the Judgment

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
When no human intervention is involved in any services, such services cannot be treated to be of nature which can be covered by scope of section 9(1)(vii)

as decided in Metro & Metro vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, I.T.A. No.: 393/Agra/2012, Date of Order : 01.11.2013, ITAT-Agra.

As regards assessee's submission that the provisions of section 9(1)(vii) will not come into play in this case because the entire testing process is automated, it is well settled that when no human intervention is involved in any services, such services cannot be treated to be of the nature which can be covered by the scope of section 9(1)(vii). It is also undisputed that question is not of more or less of human involvement. It is, the question of presence of or absence of human involvement. Furthermore testing charges paid by assessee, a manufacturer and exporter of leather goods, to a German company, could not be regarded as fee for technical services prior to amendment in section 9(1) by Finance Act 2010, it was not liable to deduct tax at source while making payment of said charges in assessment year 2008-09

Please click the following link to view the Judgment

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



Last edited by rchgiri on Fri 18 Apr 2014 - 19:13; edited 1 time in total

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
CIT Vs. M/S Sher Cot Leather Craft Ltd. Kanpur, ITA No. 134 of 2013, Date of Order: 13.12.2013, Allahabad High Court


After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the penalty is levied under Section 271-D for the violation of the provision of Section 269SS of the Act. The Tribunal in its order, after examining the entire material on record, had observed that the company made entries in the books of account for acknowledging the debt and as such there was no cash receipt on the part of the assesseecompany, and as such there could be no penalty u/s 271D for the violation of the provision of Section 269SS of the Act, in respect of book entries.

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
S. 14A & Rule 8D: Onus is on AO to show how assessee’s claim is incorrect. AO has to show direct nexus between expenditure & exempt income. Disallowance cannot be made on presumptions

as decided in DCIT Vs. M/s Allied Investments Housing P. Ltd., ITA No. 305/Mad/2013, Date of Order: 07.11.2013, ITAT-Chennai


A disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D cannot be made without recording satisfaction as to how the assessee’s calculation of s. 14A disallowance is incorrect. It is a prerequisite that before invoking Rule 8D, the AO must record his satisfaction on how the assessee’s calculation is incorrect. The AO cannot apply Rule 8D without pointing out any inaccuracy in the method of apportionment or allocation of expenses. Further, the onus is on the AO to show that expenditure has been incurred by the assessee for earning tax-free income. Without discharging the onus, the AO is not entitled to make an ad hoc disallowance. A clear finding of incurring of expenditure is necessary.
(i) No disallowance can be made on the basis of presumptions.
(ii) the mere fact that some interest expenses were incurred cannot be the reason for disallowance unless the nexus between the expense and the exempt income is established.
(iii) the assessee did not make any fresh investment during the year which could generate exempt income in forthcoming years.
(iv) the exempt income earned during the year comprised of dividend received from an investment made in an earlier year.
(v) the interest expenditure of the year is not directly related to the earning of exempt income.
(vi) the AO has not pointed out any direct nexus between the interest expenditure incurred and the exempt income earned during the year.

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Hon’ble Delhi high court held that if there is decrease in Market value of assessee’s assets since the same being of perishable nature or for any other reason become non saleable such as change in customer’s specifications, change in brand name or difference in quantities etc. The closing stock has to be valued at market price and not necessarily at cost price.

as decided in CIT vs. GLOBAL GREEN COMPANY LTD , ITA 464/2013, Date of Order : 10.12.2013, Delhi High Court

Since the respondent assessee was eligible for deduction under Section 10B of the Act and, therefore, there was no cause or reason for the assessee to deliberately write off saleable goods, and as such there could be no penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of provisioning made by assessee in respect of non saleable items disallowed by Assessing Officer.

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

V.K. Fiscal services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, ITA No. 5460 / Del / 2012, Date of Order: November 2013, ITAT – Delhi.

Where no money or bullion or jewellery or any other valuable article or thing or books of accounts or documents belonging to assessee were seized as a result of search at premises of third party, notice issued u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act was illegal, invalid and unsustainable.

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Whether the order of the Tribunal ignoring and nor dealing with the factual findings recorded by he assessing officer is perverse? Held Yes

as decided in CIT vs. N. Tarika Properties Investment Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 2080/2010, Date of Order : 28.11.2013, Delhi High Court

The Tribunal has failed to take holistic view and has relied upon neutral and general evidence in respect of share capital money received without noticing other evidence, which are :
a) The Respondent Assessee is a private limited company.
b) The subscribers were unknown persons, not related or friends.
c) The subscribers bank account statements furnished were forged and fabricated.
d) There were corresponding cash deposits in the bank accounts before issue of share application cheques.
e) The subscriber companies it has been shown were carrying on effective and day to day
business or were angle investors.
f) The subscribers did not bother and ensure protection of their investment.

In view of the above, we are of the view that the Assessee has not discharged the onus satisfactorily and the additions made by the Assessing Officer was justified and sustainable and the order of the Tribunal ignoring and nor dealing with the factual findings recorded by the assessing officer is perverse

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King

Whether loss from shares dealing cannot be deemed to be from “speculation” under explanation to s. 73 if company is not engaged in the “business” of shares dealing. Held Yes

as decided in CIT vs. M/s Orient Instrument P. Ltd., ITA No. 112/2000, Date of Order : 20.11.2013, High Court of Delhi.

The assessee, engaged in the business of trading of crafts paper etc claimed a loss of Rs. 5.53 lakhs arising on account of a transaction whereby it purchased and sold shares. The AO held that under the Explanation to s. 73, the said loss was deemed to be arising from a speculation business and could not be set off against other business profits. However, the CIT(A) and Tribunal allowed the assessee’s claim on the basis that the assessee was not engaged in the “business of purchase and sale of shares” so as to fall into the mischief of the Explanation to s. 73. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that, The assessee was engaged in the business of trading of crafts paper, installation, job work, consultancy and commission. By all means, the transaction whereby it purchased the shares and incurred loss on account of the fall in the value of the share was a solitary one. The findings of the Tribunal that the transaction did not constitute the business carried on by the company, cannot be termed as perverse or unreasonable

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Whether S. 132B(4)(b)/ 240/ 244A entitles assessee to receive interest on cash appropriated during search even if refund is directed in appeal proceedings. Held Yes

as decided in CHIRONJILAL SHARMA HUF Versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10601 OF 2013, Date of Order : 26.11.2013, Supreme Court of India.


S. 132B(4)(b) of the Act clearly shows that where the aggregate of the amounts retained under Section 132 of the Act exceeds the amounts required to meet the liability under Section 132B(1)(i), the department is liable to pay simple interest at the rate of fifteen percent on expiry of six months from the date of the order under Section 132(5) of the Act to the date of the regular assessment or re-assessment or the last of such assessments or reassessments, as the case may be.
In the instant matter the department denied the payment of interest to the assessee under Section 132B(4)(b), on the ground that the refund of excess amount is governed by Section 240 of the Act and Section 132B(4)(b) of the Act has no application. But, in our view, Section 132B(4)(b) deals with pre-assessment period and there is no conflict between this provision and Section 240 or for that matter 244(A). The former deals with reassessment period in the matters of search and seizure The view of the department is not right on the plain reading of Section 132B(4)(b) of the Act as indicated above.

Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Where Assessing Officer, during course of original assessment proceedings, delved deep into question of deduction under section 80HHF and was satisfied that deduction made were as per law, Commissioner could not revise amount without recording contrary finding

as decided in Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi –V v. New Delhi Television Ltd., ITA NO. . 1404 OF 2009 & 1691 OF 2010, Date of Order : 10.09.2013, Delhi High Court.


Please click the following link to view the Judgment.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Dear All,

Please find the following link for explanatory notes on Finance Act 2013 issued by CBDTon 24/01/2014.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wish you all the best.

rchgiri

avatar
CSoC King
CSoC King
Clarification about applicability of the relevant Finance Act and other changes for Company Secretaryship June, 2014 Examination.

DIRECT TAXES

Students appearing in paper of Tax Laws (Old Syllabus), Tax Laws and Practice (New Syllabus) of Executive Programme and Advanced Tax Laws and Practice (Old Syllabus) of Professional Programme, Advanced Tax Laws and Practice (New Syllabus) of Professional Programme in June 2014 examination may note that, for Direct Taxes portion, applicable Assessment year shall be 2014-15 (Previous Year 2013-14). Thus, Students are advised to study Finance Act, 2013 for June 2014 Examination. Further students of Executive and Professional Programme are required to update themselves about all the relevant Circulars, Clarifications, Notifications, etc. issued by the CBDT & Central Government, on or before six months prior to the date of the respective examinations.

INDIRECT TAXES

Students appearing in paper of Tax Laws (Old Syllabus), Tax Laws and Practice (New Syllabus) of Executive Programme and Advanced Tax Laws and Practice (Old Syllabus) of Professional Programme, Advanced Tax Laws and Practice (New Syllabus) of Professional Programme in June 2014 examination may note that, for Indirect taxes portion, following changes applicable for June 2014 Examination.

1. All changes made by the Finance Act, 2013.

2. All relevant Circulars, Clarifications/Notifications issued by CBEC / Central Government effective six months prior to the date of examination.

Source: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 4]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum