CORPORATE AND PROFESSIONAL UPDATE DATED MARCH 3, 2016
Table of Contents
CORPORATE AND PROFESSIONAL UPDATE DATED MARCH 3, 2016
DIRECT TAX
IT: Transfer pricing adjustment – the unusual features which remained unexplained by the assessee influenced the TPO and the AO to resort to transfer pricing adjustment and determine ALP by adopting the CUP method for the procurements from Sumitomo Japan – Denso India Ltd. Vs. CIT (2016 (3) TMI 55 Delhi High Court)
IT: Addition on account of suppressed/unaccounted turnover – AO never rejected the books of accounts maintained by the assessee. The A.O. simply quantified the difference between books of accounts and form 26AS. The assessee has explained the difference by furnishing necessary reconciliation – No additions – A. Swarna Lakshmi Vs. DCIT, Visakhapatnam (2016 (3) TMI 48 ITAT Visakhapatnam)
Penalty for concealment of income set aside by HC as notice was issued under wrong section [2016] 334 (Karnataka) Safina Hotels (P.) Ltd. v. CIT
CBDT notifies new Form for e-filing of appeal before CIT(A)
INDIRECT TAX
ST: Refund of service tax – since the appellant had reversed the credit even before making application of refund and under the admitted fact that same was not utilized by them it is considered as if Cenvat credit not availed and therefore condition provided under clause 2(g) of the Notification No. 40/2012-ST stand complied with – Ness Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CST, Div-V, Mumbai (2016 (3) TMI 10 CESTAT Mumbai)
Service Tax : Where assessee has paid service tax on full contract price of a works contract and availed credit of inputs and services and there is no revenue loss to department, department cannot seek to deny credit relying upon valuation rule 2A [2016] 329 (Bombay) Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax v. S.V. Jiwani
DVAT: The last date of filing DP-I has been extended to 31 MAR 2016 – Notification, dt.01 MAR 2016.
COMPANY LAW
MCA invites comments on the draft Companies (Revival and Rehabilitation of Sick Companies) Rules, 2016.
Partnership firm necessarily be brought to Court for maintaining prosecution against a partner for dishonouring cheque [2016] 328 (Bombay) Philip J. v. Ashapura Minechem Ltd.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances;Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavors. For query or help, contact: info@caindelhiindia.com or call at 011-233-43-333
**********************************************************
If this article has helped you in any way, i would appreciate if you could share/like it or leave a comment. Thank you for visiting my blog.
Legal Disclaimer:
The information / articles & any relies to the comments on this blog are provided purely for informational and educational purposes only & are purely based on my understanding / knowledge. They do noy constitute legal advice or legal opinions. The information / articles and any replies to the comments are intended but not promised or guaranteed to be current, complete, or up-to-date and should in no way be taken as a legal advice or an indication of future results. Therefore, i can not take any responsibility for the results or consequences of any attempt to use or adopt any of the information presented on this blog. You are advised not to act or rely on any information / articles contained without first seeking the advice of a practicing professional.