![\"www.caindelhiindia.com;](\"https:\/\/www.caindelhiindia.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/download.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nCORPORATE AND PROFESSIONAL UPDATES JULY 9, 2016<\/span><\/h2>\nDIRECT TAX:\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\nIncome Tax : Cash deposits in bank can’t be held as undisclosed income without verifying source of deposits Gurpal Singh v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Kapurthala Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Kapurthala<\/p>\n
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT denies Sec 11 exemption to assessee\u00a0,an educational trust\u00a0\u00a0with respect to income earned from renting of \u2018auditorium hall\u2019 during AY 2010-11.It\u00a0observed\u00a0that exemption u\/s 11(4) is available on income derived from business held under trust and the words ‘property held under trust’ includes business undertaking held under trust.\u00a0[TS-364-ITAT-2016(CHNY)]<\/p>\n
Income Tax: \u00a0Hyderabad ITAT rules that compensation received by assessee\u00a0,an India based publication house,in terms of settlement \u00a0agreement for not using the trademark obtained from a London based company – Longman Communications Ltd. \u00a0which was taken over by\u00a0Pearson Group, UK, \u00a0is a non-taxable capital receipt for AY 2008-09.\u00a0[TS-363-ITAT-2016(HYD)]<\/p>\n
INDIRECT TAX:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\nService tax : Consultancy service availed to procure finance for business is eligible input service Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore II Commissionerate v. Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd.[2016] 71\u00a0taxmann.com\u00a010 (Karnataka)<\/p>\n
Service tax : \u00a0 Calcutta high court in the case of\u00a0Saurav\u00a0Ganguly held that there is no service tax for writing artlcles, anchoring TV shows, playing IPL matches & Brand Endorsement.(\u00a0Sourav Ganguly -Vs.- Union of India & Ors.)<\/p>\n
Excise : Supreme Court in the judgment of the given case held that\u00a0Subsidy by way of\u00a0refund of excise duty and interest for setting up a new industrial undertaking is a capital receipt & not taxable as income. Alternatively, such receipts are “derived” from the industrial undertaking and are deductible u\/s 80-IB.(\u00a0CIT Vs. Shree Balaji Alloys)<\/p>\n
Custom : Karnataka\u00a0HC upholds Tribunal order denying exemption u\/s 5(2) of CST Act on lease transactions effected by Hewlett Packard (assessee) with local customers on ground that same did not constitute \u2018sale in course of import.\u00a0[TS-268-HC-2016(KAR)-VAT]<\/p>\n
\u00a0OTHER UPDATES:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\nBanks need not report details about invocation of bank guarantee for service imports RBI\/2016-17\/8\u00a0 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 1 Dated July 07, 2016<\/p>\n
Time period u\/s 139 to comply with provisions of rotation, changed to 1st AGM held after 3yrs from commencement of Companies Act, 2013. Removal of Difficulties 3rd Order, 2016.<\/p>\n
Where appellant holding merely eight shares objected to scheme of amalgamation which had been approved by all shareholders, secured and unsecured creditor, objection of appellant was malicious and mala fide as he was disqualified from continuing as statutory auditor of company –\u00a0[2016] 70 taxmann 394 (Delhi)<\/p>\n
KEY DATES :<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\nExcise return in Form ER-1 for non SSI assessee for the month of June:\u00a010\/07\/2016<\/p>\n
Excise Return in Form ER-2 for EOUs for the month of June:\u00a010\/07\/2016<\/p>\n
Submission of Excise Return in ER-3 by SSI unit for June quarter: 10\/07\/2016<\/p>\n
\u201cThe key to happiness is not that you never get angry, upset, frustrated, irritated or depressed it is actually, how fast you get out of it\u201d<\/p>\n
FOR FURTHER QUERIES CONTACT US:<\/p>\n
Income Tax : Cash deposits in bank can’t be held as undisclosed income without verifying source of deposits Gurpal Singh v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Kapurthala Income-tax Officer, Ward-1, Kapurthala<\/p>\n
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT denies Sec 11 exemption to assessee\u00a0,an educational trust\u00a0\u00a0with respect to income earned from renting of \u2018auditorium hall\u2019 during AY 2010-11.It\u00a0observed\u00a0that exemption u\/s 11(4) is available on income derived from business held under trust and the words ‘property held under trust’ includes business undertaking held under trust.\u00a0[TS-364-ITAT-2016(CHNY)]<\/p>\n
Income Tax: \u00a0Hyderabad ITAT rules that compensation received by assessee\u00a0,an India based publication house,in terms of settlement \u00a0agreement for not using the trademark obtained from a London based company – Longman Communications Ltd. \u00a0which was taken over by\u00a0Pearson Group, UK, \u00a0is a non-taxable capital receipt for AY 2008-09.\u00a0[TS-363-ITAT-2016(HYD)]<\/p>\n
INDIRECT TAX:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Service tax : Consultancy service availed to procure finance for business is eligible input service Commissioner of Central Excise Bangalore II Commissionerate v. Sanmar Speciality Chemicals Ltd.[2016] 71\u00a0taxmann.com\u00a010 (Karnataka)<\/p>\n Service tax : \u00a0 Calcutta high court in the case of\u00a0Saurav\u00a0Ganguly held that there is no service tax for writing artlcles, anchoring TV shows, playing IPL matches & Brand Endorsement.(\u00a0Sourav Ganguly -Vs.- Union of India & Ors.)<\/p>\n Excise : Supreme Court in the judgment of the given case held that\u00a0Subsidy by way of\u00a0refund of excise duty and interest for setting up a new industrial undertaking is a capital receipt & not taxable as income. Alternatively, such receipts are “derived” from the industrial undertaking and are deductible u\/s 80-IB.(\u00a0CIT Vs. Shree Balaji Alloys)<\/p>\n Custom : Karnataka\u00a0HC upholds Tribunal order denying exemption u\/s 5(2) of CST Act on lease transactions effected by Hewlett Packard (assessee) with local customers on ground that same did not constitute \u2018sale in course of import.\u00a0[TS-268-HC-2016(KAR)-VAT]<\/p>\n \u00a0OTHER UPDATES:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Banks need not report details about invocation of bank guarantee for service imports RBI\/2016-17\/8\u00a0 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 1 Dated July 07, 2016<\/p>\n Time period u\/s 139 to comply with provisions of rotation, changed to 1st AGM held after 3yrs from commencement of Companies Act, 2013. Removal of Difficulties 3rd Order, 2016.<\/p>\n Where appellant holding merely eight shares objected to scheme of amalgamation which had been approved by all shareholders, secured and unsecured creditor, objection of appellant was malicious and mala fide as he was disqualified from continuing as statutory auditor of company –\u00a0[2016] 70 taxmann 394 (Delhi)<\/p>\n KEY DATES :<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Excise return in Form ER-1 for non SSI assessee for the month of June:\u00a010\/07\/2016<\/p>\n Excise Return in Form ER-2 for EOUs for the month of June:\u00a010\/07\/2016<\/p>\n Submission of Excise Return in ER-3 by SSI unit for June quarter: 10\/07\/2016<\/p>\n \u201cThe key to happiness is not that you never get angry, upset, frustrated, irritated or depressed it is actually, how fast you get out of it\u201d<\/p>\n FOR FURTHER QUERIES CONTACT US:<\/p>\n