Vide Order No 141 of 2011 dated 10.8.2011 the CBDT has transferred and posted several Chief Commissioners of Income-tax & Director Generals of Income-tax with immediate effect

The CBDT has released a list dated 29.07.2011 of 49 candidates being considered for promotion to the post of Chief Commissioner of Income-tax

Download The report dated 27th July 2011 by Karnataka Lokayukta Santosh Hegde which exposes the illegal mining carried out in the State of Karnataka. The report claims that Rules were flouted, government officials bribed and private companies and banks too participated in this loot, throwing to winds all norms of corporate governance and propriety. The report says that the State has lost revenue of about Rs. 16,085 crores

CBDT’s Tax Arrear Recovery Strategy For AY 2011-12

CBDT Circular on s. 281 Prior Permission For Transfer of Assets

Representations requesting clarification on “completion of service” as provided under the Point of Taxation Rules, 2011 and Service Tax Rules, 1994 have been received from certain sections of service providers that in many situations it is not possible to issue invoices within 14 days of the completion of the service since the exact date of completion of service is difficult to identify. Instances have been given where after the task of providing the service may be physically accomplished, but certain other formalities are required to be completed from the client’s end before an invoice can be issued

Vide Order No 122 of 2011 dated 15.7.2011 the CBDT has transferred and posted Deputy / Assistant Commissioners of Income-tax with immediate effect

Vide Order No 119 of 2011 dated 14.7.2011 the CBDT has transferred and posted Commissioners / Directors of Income-tax with immediate effect

Whether Sec. 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act can be, invoked only to disallow expenditure of the nature referred to therein which is shown as “payable” as on the date of the balance sheet or it can be invoked also to disallow such expenditure which become payable at any time during the relevant previous year and was actually paid within the previous year?

Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer was right in adding the amount of liabilities being reflected in the negative net worth ascertained by the auditors of the assessee to the sale consideration for determining the capital gains on account of slump sale?