Alleged illegal mining, e-rawanna fraud but no evidence against petitioner's involvement in money laundering or proceeds of crime.
Proceeds of crime and legality of petitioner's arrest under PMLA for alleged illegal mining were examined. Grounds of arrest and reasons to believe were based solely on purported illegal mining by fabricating e-rawana bills. In first eight FIRs, petitioner was not an accused. In ninth FIR too, petitioner was not named, but ED tried implicating him as Director of DSPL, which records showed he ceased being from 07.11.2013. ED failed to substantiate petitioner's involvement as Director, Promoter or shareholder of the alleged GM Co. No material showed petitioner directly or indirectly indulged in any process connected with proceeds of crime or projected untainted proceeds. No grounds for arrest under PMLA were made out against petitioner for mo.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81796
#LegalDispute #MiningControversy #ProceedsOfCrime #MoneyLaundering #ArrestDebated - Money Laundering
Proceeds of crime and legality of petitioner's arrest under PMLA for alleged illegal mining were examined. Grounds of arrest and reasons to believe were based solely on purported illegal mining by fabricating e-rawana bills. In first eight FIRs, petitioner was not an accused. In ninth FIR too, petitioner was not named, but ED tried implicating him as Director of DSPL, which records showed he ceased being from 07.11.2013. ED failed to substantiate petitioner's involvement as Director, Promoter or shareholder of the alleged GM Co. No material showed petitioner directly or indirectly indulged in any process connected with proceeds of crime or projected untainted proceeds. No grounds for arrest under PMLA were made out against petitioner for mo.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81796
#LegalDispute #MiningControversy #ProceedsOfCrime #MoneyLaundering #ArrestDebated - Money Laundering
Secured creditor's claim over remaining asset portion rejected after failing to realize security interest within time limit.
Interpretation of Regulation 21A of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 regarding secured creditor's obligation to realize security interest within stipulated time. Regulation casts duty on secured creditor to pay liquidator estimated amount or excess realized value within prescribed timeline, failing which asset becomes part of liquidation estate. Secured creditor's contention of non-communication of estimated amount by liquidator rejected as misplaced. Law mandates secured creditor to complete realization process within 180 days, after which asset vests with liquidation estate under Regulation 21A(3). Secured creditor's belated claim over remaining property portion rejected for non-compliance with 30-day intimation requirement. Liquidator's decision upheld as per regulations. Application dismissed by Tribunal.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81797
#LiquidationRegulations #SecuredCreditor #AssetRealization #TimelineMandatory #TribunalOrder - IBC
Interpretation of Regulation 21A of IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016 regarding secured creditor's obligation to realize security interest within stipulated time. Regulation casts duty on secured creditor to pay liquidator estimated amount or excess realized value within prescribed timeline, failing which asset becomes part of liquidation estate. Secured creditor's contention of non-communication of estimated amount by liquidator rejected as misplaced. Law mandates secured creditor to complete realization process within 180 days, after which asset vests with liquidation estate under Regulation 21A(3). Secured creditor's belated claim over remaining property portion rejected for non-compliance with 30-day intimation requirement. Liquidator's decision upheld as per regulations. Application dismissed by Tribunal.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81797
#LiquidationRegulations #SecuredCreditor #AssetRealization #TimelineMandatory #TribunalOrder - IBC
Debt proven through part payments acknowledgment and future installment promise; 10A bar not applicable.
Existence of financial debt established through acknowledgment of part payments and promise to pay next installment. Section 10A bar not applicable as default occurred on 05.07.2021. Record of default sufficiently proved through loan documents and Corporate Debtor's admission, satisfying Section 7(3)(a) requirements. Stamping issue inconsequential given established debt and default above threshold. Authorized signatory confirmed through Board Resolution. Debt and default proven, exceeding Rs. 1 crore threshold. Petition admitted, Insolvency Resolution Professional appointed with directions to Financial Creditor regarding remuneration and expenses.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81798
#LoanDocuments #DefaultAdmission #StampingIssueIgnored #AuthorizedSignatory #InsolvencyInitiated - IBC
Existence of financial debt established through acknowledgment of part payments and promise to pay next installment. Section 10A bar not applicable as default occurred on 05.07.2021. Record of default sufficiently proved through loan documents and Corporate Debtor's admission, satisfying Section 7(3)(a) requirements. Stamping issue inconsequential given established debt and default above threshold. Authorized signatory confirmed through Board Resolution. Debt and default proven, exceeding Rs. 1 crore threshold. Petition admitted, Insolvency Resolution Professional appointed with directions to Financial Creditor regarding remuneration and expenses.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81798
#LoanDocuments #DefaultAdmission #StampingIssueIgnored #AuthorizedSignatory #InsolvencyInitiated - IBC
Financial Creditor's Application to Initiate Insolvency Proceedings Against Corporate Debtor Upheld by NCLAT.
The NCLAT upheld the admission of the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor (Respondent No.1) for initiating CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. It held that the Financial Creditor had a financial debt which had become due and payable, and there was an incidence of default. The application was filed within the time limitation as the Corporate Debtor had acknowledged the outstanding debt. The Corporate Debtor was given an opportunity to regularize its loan account but failed to pay the required amount. The declaration of the account as NPA under SARFAESI Act did not obstruct the Financial Creditor from initiating CIRP. The loan disbursement by the Financial Creditor was interest-bearing, satisfying the definition of financial .....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81799
#IBC #CIRP #FinancialDebt #DefaultAcknowledgement #NPADeclaration #IBC #CIRP #FinancialDebt - IBC
The NCLAT upheld the admission of the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor (Respondent No.1) for initiating CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. It held that the Financial Creditor had a financial debt which had become due and payable, and there was an incidence of default. The application was filed within the time limitation as the Corporate Debtor had acknowledged the outstanding debt. The Corporate Debtor was given an opportunity to regularize its loan account but failed to pay the required amount. The declaration of the account as NPA under SARFAESI Act did not obstruct the Financial Creditor from initiating CIRP. The loan disbursement by the Financial Creditor was interest-bearing, satisfying the definition of financial .....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81799
#IBC #CIRP #FinancialDebt #DefaultAcknowledgement #NPADeclaration #IBC #CIRP #FinancialDebt - IBC
Company petition dismissed due to lack of consent from members & time-barred allegations.
Mintainability of a company petition u/s 399 of the Companies Act, 1956, focusing on the pre-conditions envisaged under sub-sections (1) and (3). It examines whether the amendments made to the Articles of Association and declarations filed before the Registrar of Companies were prejudicial to the interests of the public, the company, and the petitioner, amounting to oppression and mismanagement. The Tribunal held that the petitioners failed to satisfy the condition precedent under sub-section (3) of Section 399 by not obtaining written consent from the rest of the members before filing the petition. Additionally, the allegations of illegal transfer of shares were barred by limitation, as the annual returns were available on the MCA website,.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81800
#CorporateDispute #ShareholderRights #BusinessLaw #LimitationPeriod #CompaniesAct - Companies Law
Mintainability of a company petition u/s 399 of the Companies Act, 1956, focusing on the pre-conditions envisaged under sub-sections (1) and (3). It examines whether the amendments made to the Articles of Association and declarations filed before the Registrar of Companies were prejudicial to the interests of the public, the company, and the petitioner, amounting to oppression and mismanagement. The Tribunal held that the petitioners failed to satisfy the condition precedent under sub-section (3) of Section 399 by not obtaining written consent from the rest of the members before filing the petition. Additionally, the allegations of illegal transfer of shares were barred by limitation, as the annual returns were available on the MCA website,.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81800
#CorporateDispute #ShareholderRights #BusinessLaw #LimitationPeriod #CompaniesAct - Companies Law
Petition dismissed for lack of evidence to probe companies for alleged fraud.
The petition filed u/s 213(b) of the Companies Act, 2013 alleged that the business of the respondent companies was being conducted with intent to defraud creditors, members, or others, or for fraudulent or unlawful purposes, or oppressively. However, the averments were not supported by material documents to substantiate such allegations. The documents filed failed to corroborate the allegations of fraudulent or unlawful conduct by the respondent company. The petitioner failed to make a prima facie case u/s 213(b). Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the petition in limine for lack of sufficient evidence to warrant appointing an inspector to investigate the respondent companies' affairs.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81801
#CorporateLaw #CompaniesAct #FraudulentConduct #OppressiveManagement #BusinessDisputes - Companies Law
The petition filed u/s 213(b) of the Companies Act, 2013 alleged that the business of the respondent companies was being conducted with intent to defraud creditors, members, or others, or for fraudulent or unlawful purposes, or oppressively. However, the averments were not supported by material documents to substantiate such allegations. The documents filed failed to corroborate the allegations of fraudulent or unlawful conduct by the respondent company. The petitioner failed to make a prima facie case u/s 213(b). Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the petition in limine for lack of sufficient evidence to warrant appointing an inspector to investigate the respondent companies' affairs.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81801
#CorporateLaw #CompaniesAct #FraudulentConduct #OppressiveManagement #BusinessDisputes - Companies Law
Minority shareholders' oppression claims against company dismissed due to lack of evidence.
The petition alleges oppression and mismanagement by the company's majority shareholders against the petitioners, who were removed as directors through an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM). The key points are: The burden is on the petitioners to prove oppressive conduct u/s 242. The EGM notice for removal complied with legal requirements, and the meeting was validly held. The majority shareholders' decision to remove directors cannot be judicially scrutinized as it is part of corporate democracy. Mere inconvenience caused by the legal process doesn't negate its validity. Oppression requires continuous wrongful acts by the majority against the minority, not just lack of confidence. The petitioners failed to prove mismanagement or likelihoo.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81802
#CorporateGovernance #ShareholderRights #BoardRemoval #MinorityProtection #CompanyLaw - Companies Law
The petition alleges oppression and mismanagement by the company's majority shareholders against the petitioners, who were removed as directors through an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM). The key points are: The burden is on the petitioners to prove oppressive conduct u/s 242. The EGM notice for removal complied with legal requirements, and the meeting was validly held. The majority shareholders' decision to remove directors cannot be judicially scrutinized as it is part of corporate democracy. Mere inconvenience caused by the legal process doesn't negate its validity. Oppression requires continuous wrongful acts by the majority against the minority, not just lack of confidence. The petitioners failed to prove mismanagement or likelihoo.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81802
#CorporateGovernance #ShareholderRights #BoardRemoval #MinorityProtection #CompanyLaw - Companies Law
Land Sale Dispute Dismissed: Company's Urgent Need for Funds Justified Lower Price.
The crux of the matter revolves around allegations of oppression, mismanagement, illegal sale of company land, allotment of equity shares, appointment and removal of directors, and the legality of extraordinary general meetings and resolutions. The key findings are: the sale of land parcels at a lower price, though below market value, does not constitute oppression or mismanagement as the company urgently required funds, and the petitioner had consented to the sale price. The lease deed with Padmavatahi Ispat, though signed, was never executed and subsequently cancelled, hence not amounting to oppression. The allotment of 17,29,000 equity shares to respondents is held to be legal and valid. The acts of respondents are not prejudicial or opp.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81803
#corporatelaw #shareholderdisputes #oppression #mismanagement #boardroomdrama - Companies Law
The crux of the matter revolves around allegations of oppression, mismanagement, illegal sale of company land, allotment of equity shares, appointment and removal of directors, and the legality of extraordinary general meetings and resolutions. The key findings are: the sale of land parcels at a lower price, though below market value, does not constitute oppression or mismanagement as the company urgently required funds, and the petitioner had consented to the sale price. The lease deed with Padmavatahi Ispat, though signed, was never executed and subsequently cancelled, hence not amounting to oppression. The allotment of 17,29,000 equity shares to respondents is held to be legal and valid. The acts of respondents are not prejudicial or opp.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81803
#corporatelaw #shareholderdisputes #oppression #mismanagement #boardroomdrama - Companies Law
Customs Warehouse Exonerated from Interest and Penalties on Duty for Fire-Related Goods Loss.
The appellants, a customs warehousing station, faced a fire incident resulting in the loss of certain goods. The customs duty amount on the lost goods was paid by the appellants. However, the proceedings aimed to recover interest and penalty on the duty amount under the Warehousing (Custody and Handling of Goods) Regulation 2016. The key points are: destruction/loss due to fire cannot be treated as removal u/ss 71 and 73A of the Customs Act, 1962, as there was no illicit physical removal. Regulation 4(c) of the Customs Warehousing Regulation, 2016, requiring an undertaking from the warehouse keeper, is not applicable as the Commissioner of Customs did not incur any liability. Section 73A applies only when goods are physically removed improp.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81804
#CustomsLaw #FireLoss #BondedWarehouse #DutyPayment #AppellateTribunal - Customs
The appellants, a customs warehousing station, faced a fire incident resulting in the loss of certain goods. The customs duty amount on the lost goods was paid by the appellants. However, the proceedings aimed to recover interest and penalty on the duty amount under the Warehousing (Custody and Handling of Goods) Regulation 2016. The key points are: destruction/loss due to fire cannot be treated as removal u/ss 71 and 73A of the Customs Act, 1962, as there was no illicit physical removal. Regulation 4(c) of the Customs Warehousing Regulation, 2016, requiring an undertaking from the warehouse keeper, is not applicable as the Commissioner of Customs did not incur any liability. Section 73A applies only when goods are physically removed improp.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81804
#CustomsLaw #FireLoss #BondedWarehouse #DutyPayment #AppellateTribunal - Customs
Customs Broker's license revocation overturned due to disproportionate punishment, time-bar violation.
The CESTAT held that the order of suspension of the appellant's Customs Broker license was passed after the expiry of the prescribed limitation period, violating Regulation 20(2) of CBLR 2013. However, the legality of the suspension order could not be decided as the challenged order was the revocation dated 12.02.2015. The gravity of the alleged offense did not warrant revocation, which is disproportionate punishment. The appellant must have suffered enough financially, acting as a deterrent. Permanent revocation would adversely impact the appellant's family and employees. The appeal was partly allowed, ordering re-issuance of the Customs Broker License subject to procedural requirements, while upholding the forfeiture of the security deposit.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81805
#LegalProcedure #CustomsLaw #AdminLaw #JudicialReview #FairTrial #CustomsBroker #LicenseRevocation - Customs
The CESTAT held that the order of suspension of the appellant's Customs Broker license was passed after the expiry of the prescribed limitation period, violating Regulation 20(2) of CBLR 2013. However, the legality of the suspension order could not be decided as the challenged order was the revocation dated 12.02.2015. The gravity of the alleged offense did not warrant revocation, which is disproportionate punishment. The appellant must have suffered enough financially, acting as a deterrent. Permanent revocation would adversely impact the appellant's family and employees. The appeal was partly allowed, ordering re-issuance of the Customs Broker License subject to procedural requirements, while upholding the forfeiture of the security deposit.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81805
#LegalProcedure #CustomsLaw #AdminLaw #JudicialReview #FairTrial #CustomsBroker #LicenseRevocation - Customs
Tribunal quashes custom duty demand due to lack of evidence for clandestine clearance of goods.
The appellant challenged the demand of customs duty and penalties imposed on the grounds of alleged clandestine clearance of short found goods from their factory premises. The Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to provide corroborative evidence or conduct proper investigation from the transporter and buyer to establish the clandestine removal. Relying solely on the statement of the appellant's director without cross-examination is not sustainable. The burden of proof lies on the Revenue to establish their case beyond doubt with sufficient evidence. As the Revenue failed to discharge this burden effectively, the demand was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81806
#TradeDisputes #CustomsLaw #BurdenOfProof #EvidenceRequired #FairTrial - Customs
The appellant challenged the demand of customs duty and penalties imposed on the grounds of alleged clandestine clearance of short found goods from their factory premises. The Tribunal held that the Revenue failed to provide corroborative evidence or conduct proper investigation from the transporter and buyer to establish the clandestine removal. Relying solely on the statement of the appellant's director without cross-examination is not sustainable. The burden of proof lies on the Revenue to establish their case beyond doubt with sufficient evidence. As the Revenue failed to discharge this burden effectively, the demand was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81806
#TradeDisputes #CustomsLaw #BurdenOfProof #EvidenceRequired #FairTrial - Customs
Customs officer lacked valid reasons to seize dried areca nuts based on mere opinion of their foreign origin.
Interpretation of the phrase "reason to believe" u/s 110 of the Customs Act, which is a crucial safeguard for authorizing officers to conduct searches. The court examined the legal principles governing "reason to believe," emphasizing that it cannot be arbitrary, capricious, or whimsical, and must be based on material evidence. The officer must independently apply their mind and not merely reproduce statutory words mechanically. The reasons must be self-explanatory and cannot be supported by extraneous material. In the present case, the suspected opinion of local traders that the seized dried areca nuts were of foreign origin was deemed unreliable and unacceptable, as their origin could not be conclusively determined by mere visual inspecti.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81807
#CustomsAct #ReasonToBelieve #JudicialScrutiny #ProceduralSafeguards #TradeDisputes #CustomsLaw - Customs
Interpretation of the phrase "reason to believe" u/s 110 of the Customs Act, which is a crucial safeguard for authorizing officers to conduct searches. The court examined the legal principles governing "reason to believe," emphasizing that it cannot be arbitrary, capricious, or whimsical, and must be based on material evidence. The officer must independently apply their mind and not merely reproduce statutory words mechanically. The reasons must be self-explanatory and cannot be supported by extraneous material. In the present case, the suspected opinion of local traders that the seized dried areca nuts were of foreign origin was deemed unreliable and unacceptable, as their origin could not be conclusively determined by mere visual inspecti.....
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81807
#CustomsAct #ReasonToBelieve #JudicialScrutiny #ProceduralSafeguards #TradeDisputes #CustomsLaw - Customs
Tribunal rejects second rectification plea on same grounds as first rejected plea.
Assessee filed second rectification application u/s 254, raising same grounds as first miscellaneous application which was already rejected. Tribunal held that except for certain documents, no evidence was available regarding payment of ESI and EPF within due dates as claimed. Second miscellaneous application filed within six months but on same grounds as first, hence not maintainable as per Smt. Vasantben H. Sheth case. Tribunal reiterated that Assessing Officer shall pass consequential order in compliance with Tribunal's order in Manikandan Vazhukkapara Kumaran case. Tribunal cannot entertain second miscellaneous application on same grounds after rejecting first.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81808
#LegalProcedure #Redundancy #TaxAssessment #RectificationApplication #TribunalOrder - Income Tax
Assessee filed second rectification application u/s 254, raising same grounds as first miscellaneous application which was already rejected. Tribunal held that except for certain documents, no evidence was available regarding payment of ESI and EPF within due dates as claimed. Second miscellaneous application filed within six months but on same grounds as first, hence not maintainable as per Smt. Vasantben H. Sheth case. Tribunal reiterated that Assessing Officer shall pass consequential order in compliance with Tribunal's order in Manikandan Vazhukkapara Kumaran case. Tribunal cannot entertain second miscellaneous application on same grounds after rejecting first.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81808
#LegalProcedure #Redundancy #TaxAssessment #RectificationApplication #TribunalOrder - Income Tax
APPEAL FOR REVOCATION GST REG
Is it possible to file an appeal for revocation of GST Reg, after 1 year, from the date of cancellation of GST registration no. - Reply By Sadanand Bulbule - The Reply = Dear Ahmmed ji In terms of Section 107[1] , three months time is allowed from the date of communication of decisions or order to the registered person. And one more month with condonation of delay is allowed under Section 107[4] of the CGST Act . So date of communication of decision or order is the determinant factor. - Reply B... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/View_discussions_detail.asp?ID=119326 - GST
Is it possible to file an appeal for revocation of GST Reg, after 1 year, from the date of cancellation of GST registration no. - Reply By Sadanand Bulbule - The Reply = Dear Ahmmed ji In terms of Section 107[1] , three months time is allowed from the date of communication of decisions or order to the registered person. And one more month with condonation of delay is allowed under Section 107[4] of the CGST Act . So date of communication of decision or order is the determinant factor. - Reply B... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/View_discussions_detail.asp?ID=119326 - GST
Taxmanagementindia
APPEAL FOR REVOCATION GST REG, Goods and Services Tax - GST
Discussion Forum An issue, query raised by the member of TMI for reply, post by the experts on TaxTMI on APPEAL FOR REVOCATION GST REG, Goods and Services Tax -
IBBI to celebrate its Eighth Annual Day tomorrow
- - - Dated:- 30-9-2024 - Winners of the 5th National Online Quiz on IBC to be felicitated with a merit certificate, medal, and cash prize on the occasion The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) is celebrating its Eighth Annual Day on 1 st October 2024 . The main event to mark the occasion is being organised in New Delhi. Chief Justice (Retd.) Mr Ramalingam Sudhakar, the President of the National Company Law Tribunal, will be the Chief Guest and will deliver a keynote address. Mr. A... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27954
- - - Dated:- 30-9-2024 - Winners of the 5th National Online Quiz on IBC to be felicitated with a merit certificate, medal, and cash prize on the occasion The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) is celebrating its Eighth Annual Day on 1 st October 2024 . The main event to mark the occasion is being organised in New Delhi. Chief Justice (Retd.) Mr Ramalingam Sudhakar, the President of the National Company Law Tribunal, will be the Chief Guest and will deliver a keynote address. Mr. A... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27954
Governance in SFBs - Driving Sustainable Growth and Stability (Keynote Address by Shri Swaminathan J, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India - September 27, 2024 - at the Conference of Directors of Small Finance Banks in Bengaluru)
1. Chairpersons and Directors of the Boards of Small Finance Banks; Chief Executive Officers of SFBs; Executive Directors, Chief General Managers and colleagues from the Reserve Bank of India; ladies and gentlemen. A very good morning to all of you. 2. It is an honour to address this distinguished gathering in the inaugural conference of Board of Directors of Small Finance Banks organised by the RBI. As has been mentioned, this conference is in continuation of the Reserve Bank s efforts to reac... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27955
1. Chairpersons and Directors of the Boards of Small Finance Banks; Chief Executive Officers of SFBs; Executive Directors, Chief General Managers and colleagues from the Reserve Bank of India; ladies and gentlemen. A very good morning to all of you. 2. It is an honour to address this distinguished gathering in the inaugural conference of Board of Directors of Small Finance Banks organised by the RBI. As has been mentioned, this conference is in continuation of the Reserve Bank s efforts to reac... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27955
Monthly Review of Accounts of Government of India upto August, 2024 (FY2024-25)
- - - Dated:- 30-9-2024 - The Monthly Account of the Government of India upto the month of August, 2024 has been consolidated and reports published. The highlights are given below: - The Government of India has received ₹12,17,178 crore (38.0% of corresponding BE 2024-25 of Total Receipts upto August, 2024 comprising ₹8,73,845 crore Tax Revenue (Net to Centre), ₹3,34,467 crore of Non-Tax Revenue and ₹8,866 crore of Non-Debt Capital Receipts. ₹4,55,717 crore has bee... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27956
- - - Dated:- 30-9-2024 - The Monthly Account of the Government of India upto the month of August, 2024 has been consolidated and reports published. The highlights are given below: - The Government of India has received ₹12,17,178 crore (38.0% of corresponding BE 2024-25 of Total Receipts upto August, 2024 comprising ₹8,73,845 crore Tax Revenue (Net to Centre), ₹3,34,467 crore of Non-Tax Revenue and ₹8,866 crore of Non-Debt Capital Receipts. ₹4,55,717 crore has bee... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27956
CBDT extends specified date for filing of various reports of audit for the Assessment Year 2024-25
- - - Dated:- 30-9-2024 - In view of difficulties reported by taxpayers and other stakeholders in filing of audit reports for AY 2024-25 under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the CBDT has extended the specified date for filing of audit reports for AY 2024-25 from 30 th September, 2024 to 07 th October, 2024. CBDT Circular No. 10/2024 in F.No. 225/205/2024-ITA-II dated 29.09.2024 issued. The said Circular is available on www.incometaxindia.gov.in . - ... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27957
- - - Dated:- 30-9-2024 - In view of difficulties reported by taxpayers and other stakeholders in filing of audit reports for AY 2024-25 under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the CBDT has extended the specified date for filing of audit reports for AY 2024-25 from 30 th September, 2024 to 07 th October, 2024. CBDT Circular No. 10/2024 in F.No. 225/205/2024-ITA-II dated 29.09.2024 issued. The said Circular is available on www.incometaxindia.gov.in . - ... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_rss_feed.asp?ID=27957
b2b rcm to regular b2b
how to update in GSTR portal for wrong e-invoice made as B2B RCM Instead of regular B2B and updated in GSTR-1 in nov 2023. - Reply By Shilpi Jain - The Reply = Issue a credit note for the old invoice and generate a fresh e-invoice. - Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN - The Reply = I endorse the views of Ms. Shilphi. ... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/View_discussions_detail.asp?ID=119328 - GST
how to update in GSTR portal for wrong e-invoice made as B2B RCM Instead of regular B2B and updated in GSTR-1 in nov 2023. - Reply By Shilpi Jain - The Reply = Issue a credit note for the old invoice and generate a fresh e-invoice. - Reply By DR.MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN - The Reply = I endorse the views of Ms. Shilphi. ... ... ...
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/View_discussions_detail.asp?ID=119328 - GST
Taxmanagementindia
b2b rcm to regular b2b, Goods and Services Tax - GST
Discussion Forum An issue, query raised by the member of TMI for reply, post by the experts on TaxTMI on b2b rcm to regular b2b, Goods and Services Tax -
Export Incentive Scheme Extension with Revisions for Budget Adherence.
The RoDTEP scheme for exports manufactured by DTA Units is extended until 30.09.2025, while for exports by Advance Authorization holders (excluding deemed exports), EOUs, and SEZ Units, it is extended until 31.12.2024. To adhere to the budgetary framework, necessary changes will be made to the scheme benefits, including revisions or deletions in eligible items, rates, value caps, and other measures. New RoDTEP rates based on the committee's recommendations are notified from 10.10.2024 under revised Appendices 4R and 4RE, available on the DGFT portal. For exports between 01.10.2024 and 09.10.2024, existing rates apply. The notification aims to extend the RoDTEP scheme while making adjustments to remain within the approved budget.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81845
#ExportIncentives #RoDTEP #ManufacturingExports #BudgetaryFramework #PolicyUpdates - DGFT
The RoDTEP scheme for exports manufactured by DTA Units is extended until 30.09.2025, while for exports by Advance Authorization holders (excluding deemed exports), EOUs, and SEZ Units, it is extended until 31.12.2024. To adhere to the budgetary framework, necessary changes will be made to the scheme benefits, including revisions or deletions in eligible items, rates, value caps, and other measures. New RoDTEP rates based on the committee's recommendations are notified from 10.10.2024 under revised Appendices 4R and 4RE, available on the DGFT portal. For exports between 01.10.2024 and 09.10.2024, existing rates apply. The notification aims to extend the RoDTEP scheme while making adjustments to remain within the approved budget.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81845
#ExportIncentives #RoDTEP #ManufacturingExports #BudgetaryFramework #PolicyUpdates - DGFT
Pandemic chaos allows amnesty compliance delay, HC grants tax relief.
Taxpayer company availed amnesty scheme benefit, deposited tax amount, but failed to communicate timely due to COVID-19 pandemic and consultant's death. HC quashed revenue's order denying amnesty benefit, directed granting full benefit by accepting deposited tax amount as final settlement for the year, considering pandemic situation and limitation extension by Supreme Court order.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81840
#TaxAmnesty #COVID19Impact #RevenueDepartment #JudicialIntervention #TaxpayerRelief #TaxAmnesty - VAT / Sales Tax
Taxpayer company availed amnesty scheme benefit, deposited tax amount, but failed to communicate timely due to COVID-19 pandemic and consultant's death. HC quashed revenue's order denying amnesty benefit, directed granting full benefit by accepting deposited tax amount as final settlement for the year, considering pandemic situation and limitation extension by Supreme Court order.
Source:
https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/tmi_highlights_details.asp?id=81840
#TaxAmnesty #COVID19Impact #RevenueDepartment #JudicialIntervention #TaxpayerRelief #TaxAmnesty - VAT / Sales Tax