newsletter for the month of april 2012

19 April2012

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

20April2012

3 April2012


Contd. from previous page

With warm regards,

CA. Nithin MahadevappaChairman

• Two CPE Teleconferences• Two CPE Study Circle Meetings• Two CPE Impact Seminars• Souharda Empanelment Training Program

All the programs in the month of March 2012 were wellattended by our members, students and public at large. Alsoabout 5000 people across the globe have watched the programslive through Web-casting. I on behalf of Bangalore branchthank all the speakers, resource persons, Managing Committeemembers, Central Council members, Regional Councilmembers, professional colleagues, students, public andemployees of Bangalore branch for having supported all theevents and programs.

April 2012 activities

Focusing on the theme of the year PARINATI – Proficiency& Prosperity, the outlook on the activities for April 2012onwards will be on intensive workshops and seminars.

Workshop on Service Tax

Union Budget 2012 has opened plethora of controversies inthe form of inclusion of Negative list in Service Tax Lawsand as professionals we need to be equipped with completeand updated knowledge. Keeping this in mind we would liketo conduct at least 6-8 workshops and seminars exclusivelyon Service Tax Laws at various levels. I request the membersto offer their valuable suggestions regarding the structure ofworkshops and seminars. We are also planning to conduct aworkshop for beginners on this topic in the coming months.

During this month we are conducting workshops on ServiceTax Valuations covering Valuation and Point of Taxation Rules.

Workshop on International Taxation

Bangalore being the IT Capital of Asia, having the presenceof major global players in this field, is more exposed to theCross Border Transactions and has provided a lot ofprofessional opportunities for us. To enable the members toacquire the specialized knowledge in the area of InternationalTransaction we have organized a workshop on ‘InternationalTaxation’ emphasizing on basics. We are conducting fewmore workshops on this topic at various levels in the forthcoming months.

Seminar on Schedule VI (Revised)

Seminar on Implementation & Issues relating to RevisedSchedule VI is organized focusing mainly on theimplementation and incidental issues.

Refresher Course for Accountants & Finance forNon Finance Executives

Bangalore branch is planning to conduct a Refresher Coursefor Accountants in the month of May 2012 to enable nonqualified accountants to have knowledge for preparation offinancial statements in accordance with Schedule VI(Revised). Also the programme emphasizes on basics andpractice regarding various statutes.

The Bangalore branch is commencing XVI Batch of theCourse on Finance for Non Finance Executives under theaegis of Management Development Programmes (MDP)during June 2012.

I request the members to refer their clients, accountants tothese programmes and support Bangalore branch initiative.These programmes will help the accountants & clients tobetter understand and present their financial statements.

Web-casting & ICAI Tube

‘ICAI TUBE’ Bangalore branch’s initiative of archiving andstreaming of programs in the form of videos was wellappreciated by the members*. All the recorded programs ofBangalore branch are hosted in the Bangalore branch website,to watch these videos please visit www.bangaloreicai.org/resources/icai-tube. All major programmes of the branchare webcasted live at www.bangaloreicai.org / resources/livetv for the benefit of the members.

*One of the appreciation mails received(CA. Shah DJ, USA)

A very good work doing by Bangalur Chapter formembers. See video of Bank Audit Seminar FREE OFCOST ........................Sent by Annaji.Worth doing formembers, to those who can not attend the Seminar.Thisis the spirit required from a true professional.

Reading Rooms

Board of Studies (BOS) of The Institute of CharteredAccountants of India intends to start reading room facilitiesacross Bangalore in Association with Schools, Colleges andLibraries, etc. Wherein BOS will assist by way of grants forFurniture, Air-conditioning, etc. required for such facility.I request the members who are in association with suchinstitutions to contact Bangalore branch to facilitate the initiative.

4April2012

CALENDAR OF EVENTS - April & May 2012Date/Day Topic /Speaker Venue/Time CPE Credit

DISCLAIMER : The Bangalore Branch of ICAI is not in anyway responsible for the result of any action taken on the basisof the advertisement published in the newsletter. The members, however, bear in mind the provision of the code of ethics whileresponding to the advertisements. The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Branch Newsletter are those of the authors

and do not necessarily reflect that of Bangalore Branch of ICAI.

Note : High Tea at 5.30 pm for programmes at 6.00 pm at Branch Premises.

Advertisement Tariff for the Branch NewsletterColour full pageOutside back ` 30,000/-Inside back ` 24,000/-

Advt. material should reach us before 22nd of previous month.

Inside Black & WhiteFull page ` 15,000/-Half page ` 8,000/-Quarter page ` 4,000/-

Editor : CA. Nithin MahadevappaSub Editors : CA. Ravindranath. S.N

CA. Prasad. S.RCA. Shivakumar. H

04.04.12 Service Tax - Recent Budget Amendments - Finance Act 2012 Branch PremisesWednesday CA. Sai Prasad 06.00pm to 08.00pm

11.04.12 CPE Teleconference on Revised Schedule VI of the Companies Act 1956 Branch PremisesWednesday CA. Ganesh Balakrishnan, Hyderabad 11.00am to 01.00pm

11.04.12 Budget changes in respect of International Taxation Branch PremisesWednesday (Impact Seminar - No Delegate Fee) 05.30pm to 08.30pm

CA. D. S. Vivek

12th, 13th, Workshop on Communication Skills Branch Premises16th & 17th Co-ordinator: CA. Subramanium Chittur 05.00pm to 08.00pmApril 2012 Delegate Fee: Rs.1,200/- Refer Page No: 16

16th, 17th, Workshop on International Taxation Branch Premises19th & 20th 04.00pm to 08.15pmApril 2012 Delegate Fee: Rs.1,000/- Refer Page No:17

18.04.12 Revised Schedule VI - applicable to small companies Branch PremisesWednesday (Impact Seminar - No Delegate Fee) 05.30pm to 08.30pm

CA. Mohan R. Lavi

23rd, 24th Workshop on Service Tax Valuation Branch Premises& 26th Co-ordinator: CA. Naveen Rajpurohit 04.00pm to 08.15pmApril 2012 Delegate Fee: Rs.750/- Refer Page No:18

25.04.12 CPE Teleconference on Auditing Standards Branch PremisesWednesday CA. P.R. Ramesh, Hyderabad 11.00am to 01.00pm

25.04.12 Karnataka State Budget Analysis & Recent Notifications in KVAT Branch PremisesWednesday CA. S. Venkataramani & CA. Sanjay M. Dhariwal 06.00pm to 08.00pm

28.04.12 Seminar on “Implementation & Issues relating to Revised Schedule VI” Branch PremisesSaturday Speakers : 09.30am to 01.30pm

CA. N. Nityananda, CA. K. Gururaj Acharya & CA. Ravi PrasadDelegate Fee: Rs.300/- Refer Page No:17

02.05.12 Discussion on Budget Provisions:1. Rajiv Gandhi Equity Branch PremisesWednesday Saving Scheme 2. Funding Start-ups - Classifed as Income 06.00pm to 08.00pm

CA. Shubha Ganesh

03.05.12 Workshop on Practical Issues in TDS & Efiling Branch PremisesThursday & Co-ordinator: CA. D.R. Venkatesh 04.00pm to 08.00pm04.05.12Friday Delegate Fee: Rs.500/- Refer Page No:18

3 hrs

2 hrs

2 hrs

12 hrs

2 hrs

16 hrs

3 hrs

12 hrs

2 hrs

4 hrs

2 hrs

8 hrs

5 April2012


TAX UPDATES FEBRUARY 2012CA. Chythanya K.K., B.Com, FCA, LL.B., Advocate

VAT, CST, ENTRY TAX,PROFESSIONAL TAX

PARTS DIGESTED:

a) 47 VST – Part 6b) 48 VST – Part 1c) 16 KCTJ – Part 11d) 72 KLJ – Part 1 & 2

Reference / Description

2012 (72) Kar. L.J. 22 (Tri.) (DB):Laxmi Cashew Industries v. State ofKarnataka - In the instant case theKarnataka Appellate Tribunal dealingin respect of input tax credit held thatif the appellant has succeeded inestablishing the genuineness of thetransactions, it is not proper to denythe input tax credit to the appellant forthe reasons that the selling dealer hasnot reported the correct turnover inForm VAT 100 and has not dischargedthe tax liability.

2012 (72) Kar. L.J. 116 (HC) (DB):H.S. Chandra Shekar Hande v .Stateof Karnataka - In the instant case, theassessee was engaged in the businessof fabrication and erection of structuralworks. He had filed annual returnshowing the total turnover as Rs.37,62,208.51/-, and had claimedexemption on the turnover of Rs.23,71,721.42/- under the head labourand other like charge involved in theexecution of works contract. TheAssessing Authority held thatexemption could have been granted ifthe assessee has been assessed to taxunder Section 5-B of the KST Act.However, as the assessee had opted forcomposition rate of tax where totalconsideration is the criteria for levy oftax, such an exemption is not availableunder Section 17(6) of the KSTAct.The Karnataka High Court heldthat the assessee would not be entitled

to any exemption in respect of thatlabour charge which is included in theworks contract when once he opts forcomposition of tax under Section 17(6).However, if he enters into purely labourcontract where no aspect of sale isinvolved and consideration received inthe labour contract is outside the claimof Sales Tax Act, no portion of thatlabour charge is liable to tax under theKST Act. If the total turnover whichhe has declared in the return has boththese components i.e. considerationreceived in a pure labour contract andthe consideration received in the workscontract, he is liable to pay tax underSection 17(6) only in respect of workscontract. In respect of the considerationreceived in the labour contract, no taxneed to be paid. In this welcomedecision, the honourable KarnatakaHigh Court rightly deviated from itsearlier ruling in T.H.Venkate Gowdavs. CCT (2006) 61 Kar.L.J. 289.Accordingly, even if a dealer has optedfor composition, he need not offer totax those contracts which areexclusively labour.

2012 (72) Kar. L.J. 139 (Tri.) (DB):Mandovi Motors (Pvt.) Ltd. v. State ofKarnataka - In the instant case thecredit note was issued by the sellingdealer to the appellant without thedetails of the tax element. The appellantclaimed input tax credit on the saidcredit note and the same wasdisallowed by the AssessingAuthority.The Karnataka AppellateTribunal held that if the credit note isrequired to be issued without the intentto reduce the liability of the sellingdealer, the credit note so issued will notbe a credit note issued under Section30 of the KVAT Act because, the saidSection requires the issue of credit note

to reduce the tax liability of the sellingdealer. The Tribunal further held thatthe credit note so issued without thedetails of the tax element does notentitle the selling dealer to claim thereduction in the tax liability. When theselling dealer cannot claim any taxreduction on his liability on thestrength of such credit note, which isthe primary document necessary toclaim such reduction, there is nojustification or requirement for thepurchasing dealer to admit and pay taxon the price reduction received by himfrom the selling dealer by way of cashdiscount. If the credit note issued by theselling is not in accordance with theprovisions of Section 30(1), the creditnote so issued cannot be treated as a creditnote issued under the KVAT Act. If theselling dealer has not availed the benefitof tax reduction on account of the creditnotes involved therein, the appellantcannot be called upon to reverse the inputtax claimed in this regard. Thehonourable tribunal rightly held thatunless the output tax liability of the sellerhas not been reduced, input tax claimedby the buyer cannot be reversed as bothwork on reciprocal basis.

INCOME TAX

PARTS DIGESTED:

a) 340 ITR – Part 4 & 6b) 341 ITR – Part 1 & 2c) 204 Taxman – Part 5 to 7d) 205 Taxman – Part 1e) 13 ITR (Trib) – Part 6 & 7f) 14 ITR (Trib) – Part 1 & 2g) 134 ITD – Part 5 to 9h) 37 CAPJ – Part 4i) 43-B BCAJ – Part 5j) 6 International Taxation–Part 2

Reference / Description

[2012] 341 ITR 145 (Guj. -HC): AIAEngineering Ltd. v. DisputeResolution Panel and another - In theinstant case the assessee had raisedobjections before the Dispute

6April2012

Resolution Panel (DRP) against thedraft assessment order passed by theAssessing Officer. Subsequently,assessee requested the DRP forwithdrawal of the objections filedbefore the DRP, as the assessee haddecided to prefer an appeal before theCommissioner (Appeals) as per theCBDT clarification which clarified thata choice had been given to the assesseeto go before the DRP or prefer thenormal appellate channel. Despite ofthe same, the DRP directed theAssessing Officer to pass theassessment order in consonance withthe draft assessment order therebyignoring the submission of the assesseethat the assessee would want to preferan appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals). The Gujarat High Courtheld the DRP was not right inconfirming the draft assessment orderwithout considering assessee’sobjections on merits because, firstly,the objections raised by the assesseehad not been decided, secondly, in viewof the directions issued by the DRP theassessee would not be in a position toavail the remedy of appeal before theCommissioner (Appeals) and thirdly, inthe light of the observations made bythe DRP that the assessee had chosento withdraw the objections, preferringany appeal against the order before anyforum would be an exercise in futility,as no appeal would be entertainedagainst an order passed on a concession.The Court further held that the DRP hadvirtually closed all doors for theassessee, which caused immenseprejudice to the assessee, therefore heldthat the order of the DRP and assessmentpursuant to the order made by the DRPcould not be sustained.

[2012] 341 ITR 203 (Uttarakhand –HC): Hyundai Heavy Industries Ltd.v. UOI and others - In the instant casethe Uttarakhand High Court held thatin order to avoid likelihood of bias, the

jurisdictional Commissioner shouldnot be nominated as a member of theDispute Resolution Panel.

[2012] 341 ITR 219 (Kar. - HC): CITand another v. Millipore India Pvt.Ltd. - In the instant case the assesseewas engaged in the manufacture andexport of garments. For the assessmentyear 2001-02, the Assessing Officerpassed an assessment order underSection 143(3) of the IT Act. TheCommissioner set aside the orderholding that the Assessing Officer inthe original assessment order had notreduced the deduction allowable underSection 80-IB before computing thededuction admissible under Section80HHC as required under Section 80-IB(13) r.w.s. 80IA(9).The KarnatakaHigh Court held that Section 80-IA(9)affects the allowability of deductionsand not computation of deductions. Itwas held that while computingdeduction under section 80 HHC, thesame has to be computed on a stand-alone basis. It is only while allowing thededuction so computed, the provisionsof section 80 IA (9) could be passed onto service. In other words, whileconsidering profits of the business in theapplication of formula under section 80HHC (3), such profits as such, cannotbe reduced by the deduction alreadyclaimed under section 80 IA.

[2012] 341 ITR 247 (Delhi - HC):Alpine Electronics Asia Pte. Ltd. v.DGIT and another - In the instant casethe Delhi High Court held that Section143(2) of the IT Act is applicable toproceedings under Sections 147/148 ofthe Act. The proviso to Section 148 ofthe Act protects and grants liberty tothe Revenue to serve notice underSection 143(2) before passing of theassessment order for returns furnishedon or before October 1, 2005. In respectof returns filed pursuant to notice underSection 148 after October 1, 2005, it is

mandatory to serve notice underSection 143(2) of the Act within thestipulated time-limit.

In this welcome decision, thehonourable Delhi High Court removethe controversy created by its earlierdecision in the case of 2011-TIOL-419-HC-DEL-IT CIT, New Delhi VsMadhya Bharat Energy Corpn Ltd(Dated: July 11, 2011), wherein it washeld that issue of notice under section143 (2) was not necessary in the caseof the assessment proceedings.

[2012] 204 Taxman 543 (Guj. -HC)17; taxmann.com 156 (Guj. -HC): CIT v. Radhe Developers - In theinstant case assessee was engaged inbusiness of developing housingprojects approved by local authority.It entered into a developmentagreement in terms of which assesseehad to buy land from landowner fordevelopment purpose. Afterdeveloping land, assessee was to sellthat property against to land owners ata predetermined price. Thereupon,landowner agreed to sell saiddeveloped property to a third party.Assessee’s claim for deduction underSection 80-IB in respect of aforesaidproject was rejected by AssessingOfficer for the reason that assessee wasnot owner of land.The Gujarat HighCourt held that there is nothing underSection 80-IB(10) requiring thatownership of land must vest indeveloper to be able to qualify for suchdeduction. Even otherwise, sinceassessee had taken full responsibilitiesfor execution of development projectand profit or loss which might resultfrom execution of project belongedentirely to assessee, in such a case, factthat assessee may not have owned landwould be of no consequence.

[2012] 204 Taxman 133 (Kar. – HC)(Mag.); 17 taxmann.com 167 (Kar. -HC): CIT v. Flowserve Microfinish

7 April2012


Valves (P.) Ltd. - In the instant case theKarnataka High Court held thatexpenses reduced from export turnoverfor purposes of computing deductionunder Section 10A of the IT Act has tobe reduced from total turnover as well.

[2012] 204 Taxman 133 (Kar. – HC)(Mag.); 17 taxmann.com 167 (Kar. -HC): CIT v. Flowserve MicrofinishValves (P.) Ltd. - In the instant case theKarnataka High Court held thatmiscellaneous income received byassessee on refund of Central Sales Taxhad to be included for purpose ofcomputing deduction under Section10B of the IT Act

[2012] 204 Taxman 133 (Kar. – HC)(Mag.); 17 taxmann.com 167 (Kar. -HC): CIT v. Flowserve MicrofinishValves (P.) Ltd. - In the instant caseassessee had made a claim for deductionof certain amount paid towardsmerchants overtime charges to Excisedepartment. According to assessee,though it pertained to earlier assessmentyears and was due, but demand came tobe made and amount was spent inrelevant assessment years, therefore hadclaimed aforesaid deduction underSection 37(1) of the IT Act. TheKarnataka High Court held that assesseewas entitled to claim deduction inrelevant assessment year in which suchovertime charges came to be paid by it.

[2012] 204 Taxman 606 (Delhi – HC);17 taxmann.com 241 (Delhi - HC):CIT v. Tata Communications InternetServices Ltd. - In the instant case thequestion that came up before the DelhiHigh Court was whether bar asprovided under Section 80-IA(3) is tobe considered only for first year ofclaim for deduction under Section 80-IA.The Delhi High Court held thatonce assessee is able to show that ithas used new plant and machinerywhich has not been previously used forany purpose and new undertaking is not

formed by splitting up orreconstruction of business already inexistence, it is entitled to deductionunder Section 80-IA for subsequentyears. The decision of the honourableDelhi High Court is in line with thedecision of the honourable KarnatakaHigh Court in the case of Sami LabsLtd. v. ACIT [2011] 334 ITR 157(Kar.)holding that the conditionrelating to following of the undertakinghas to be satisfied in the first year andnot in the subsequent years.

[2012] 204 Taxman 162 (Kar. – HC)(Mag.); 17 taxmann.com 113 (Kar. -HC): Anil Kumar v. ITO - In theinstant case the Assessee was engagedin purchase and sale of non-ferrousmetals, scraps, skimming ashes andother commodities. He purchased goodsfrom one country to another country ata margin of profit by arranging directshipment from purchasing country toselling country. Sale proceeds werereceived in convertible foreign currencyand payments were also made inconvertible foreign currency. Assesseefiled his return claiming deductionunder Section 80HHC of the IT Act inrespect of export profits. AssessingOfficer took a view that assessee hadnot exported out of India any goods ormerchandise, since goods did not passthrough customs station in India andsince goods had not moved from Indianterritory, it could not be said that therewas export of goods or merchandise outof India.The Karnataka High Court heldthat Explanation (aa) read with mainSection does not in any way indicatethat, to be eligible for benefit ofdeduction under Section 80HHC, goodsor merchandise has to emanate fromIndia. After purchasing goods from onecountry, if those goods are directly soldto another country and in that process,profit is brought into India in convertibleforeign exchange, assessee is entitled tobenefit of deduction under Section

80HHC. In this interesting case, thehonourable Karnataka High Courtrecognised the import of goods from onecountry and export of the same toanother country without getting thosegoods into the country.

[2012] 205 Taxman 26 (Kar. – HC);18 taxmann.com 37 (Kar. - HC): DITv. Sri Ramkrishna Seva Ashrama - Inthe instant case the Karnataka HighCourt dealing in respect of Section 11of the IT Act held that it is not necessarythat a voluntary contribution should bemade with a specific direction to treat itas corpus. If the intention of donor is togive money to a trust which will keep itin trust account in deposit and incomefrom same is utilized for carrying oncharitable and religious activities, itsatisfied definition part of corpus and,in such a situation assessee would beentitled to benefit of exemption frompayment of tax under Section 11(1)(d)of the IT Act.

[2012] 205 Taxman 93 (Delhi – HC);18 taxmann.com 144 (Delhi – HC):CIT v. AT & T CommunicationServices India (P.) Ltd. - In the instantcase the Delhi High Court held thatdisallowance of certain amount byinvoking provisions of Section 40(a)(i)of the IT Act could not be a ground tolevy penalty under Section 271(1)(c).

[2012] 43-B BCAJ 545 (Mum. – Tri.):Hansraj Mathuradas v. ITO - In theinstant case the Mumbai Tribunalreferring to the CBDT Circular No. 8/2005 dated 29.08.2005 opined thatonce fringe benefit tax is levied onexpenses incurred, it follows that thesame are treated as fringe benefitsprovided by the assessee as employerto its employees and the same have toappropriately allowed as expensesincurred wholly and exclusivelyincurred by the assessee for the purposeof its business under Section 37(1) ofthe IT Act.

8April2012

RECENT JUDICIALPRONOUNCEMENTS ININDIRECT TAXESCA. N.R. Badrinath, Grad C.W.A., F.C.A.CA. Madhur Harlalka, B. Com., F.C.A

VAT

1. Discount cannot be denied solelyon the ground that the discountamounts are not shown in the saleinvoices: The appeal before theSupreme Court is against the orderpassed by High Court of Keralaholding that the discounts giventhrough credit notes are tradeincentives and are outside thescope of discount covered by Rule9(a) of the Kerala General SalesTax Rules and hence does notqualify for deduction from taxableturnover. It was further alleged thatthe discount should be given in thetax invoice to claim the deductionand deduction should have beenclaimed in the monthly return itself.

The Supreme Court while settingaside the order of the High Courtheld that Rule 9(a) of KeralaGeneral Sales Tax Rules does notstate that discounts if any shouldbe shown on the face of invoice toclaim the benefit of deduction fromthe taxable turnover but stipulatesthat the discount must be shown inthe accounts. On a plain reading ofthe provision it is clear that theexemption is allowable subject totwo conditions; first, the discountis given in accordance with theregular practice in the trade andsecondly, the accounts should showthat the purchaser had paid only thesum originally charged less thediscount. Supreme Court foundnothing in Rule 9(a) to read it inthe restrictive manner to mean that

a discount in order to qualify forexemption under its provision mustbe shown in the invoice itself. Sofar as the special discount isconcerned, all that the authoritieshave to look into whether as amatter of fact, the petitionerreceived only the sum originallycharged less the discount. It is thelook out of the traders to see thetrade increase and it is for thatpurpose the trade discount is given.Hence, a person may not be able toclearly prove as to why the specialdiscount was given, but if there hasbeen a consistent practice of givingspecial discount, that has to beaccepted by the assessing authority.The assessing authority shall notreject the appellants’ claim forexemption of the amounts of tradediscount solely on the ground thatthe discount amounts were notshown in the sale invoices. [M/s IFBIndustries LTD Vs State of Keralaand The India Cements LTD vs TheAssistant Commissioner 2012-TIOL-22-SC-CT]

2. Whether the sale was inter-Stateor intra-State is a question of fact– High Court should not haveentertained writ petition: Theissue before the Supreme Court iswith respect to admissibility of writpetition filed before the HighCourt. The appellants hadapproached the High Court byfiling a petition under Article 226of the Constitution, interalia,seeking a writ in the nature of

mandamus to the respondents /revenue to treat the sales as purelyinter-State sale and, therefore notexigible for the levy of tax under theVAT Act and also sought forincidental and ancillary prayers inthe writ petition. The High Courtdecided the case against the assesseeand held that they are liable forpayment of tax under the VAT Act.The appellants filed a Special LeavePetition before the Supreme Courtfor which the leave was granted andthe order passed by High Court wasset aside. It was held that the HighCourt ought not to have entertainedthe writ petitions filed under Article226 of the Constitution, becausewhether a sale originating in a Stateis an inter-State sale or not isessentially a question of fact to bedetermined by the authorities underthe Act, since it involves theapplication of the provisions ofSections 3, 5, 6 and 9(i) of the Actto the facts established and hence,it will be a mixed question of lawand fact. The facts are required tobe brought to the notice of theassessing authority by the appellantsand it is for the assessing authorityto come to a conclusion, based onthose facts whether a particulartransaction is intra-State sale whichis exigible to the taxes under theVAT Act or inter-State sale, asenvisaged under Section 3 of theCentral Sales Tax Act read withSection 6 of the charging provisionstherein. It is after such adjudication,the matter can travel from one stageto the other as provided under theAct. Therefore the orders passed bythe High Court were set asidedirecting the appellants / assesseesto file their monthly / annual returnsbefore the assessing authority. [M/sZunaid Enterprises Vs State of MP,2012-TIOL-27-SC-CT]

9 April2012


Central Excise

3. Time limitation under Section11B of the Central Excise Act,1944 for claiming rebate: Theissue before the High Court waswhether the time limit prescribedunder section 11B of CentralExcise Act, 1944 is applicable tothe rebate claim filed under Rule18 of the Central Excise Rules. Onanalysis of the Notification issuedunder Rule 18, it is held that timelimit as specified in Section 11B ofCentral Excise Act, 1944 is notapplicable as Notification 19/2004dated 06.09.2004 does not stipulatetime limit within which the refundapplication has to be made. TheNotification No. 41/94 dated12.09.1994 which was the previousnotification in respect of the rebateof duty for the earlier periods givesthe details about the procedureswherein it has been specificallystated that the claim for rebate ofduty has to be made within timelimit as, specified under section 11Bof the Central Excise and Salt Act1944. However, no such conditionhas been prescribed in the presentNotification No. 19/2004.Notification 19/2004 retains all theconditions of earlier Notification 41/94 omitting the condition pertainingto time limit. Hence, the Court heldthat the rebate amount claimed bypaid to the petitioner. [DorcasMarket Makers Private Limited,Chennai vs 1. CCEx (Appeals),Chennai 2. Deputy CCEx, Chennai2012-TIOL-108-HC-Mad-CX]

4. Levy of penalty when duty andinterest is paid: The issue beforethe Tribunal is the quantum ofpenalty that is to be paid on theamount of CENVAT credit claimedby the appellant wrongly withoutapplying the formula as mentionedunder Rule 3(7) on the inputs

received from 100% EOU. Thedepartment initiated theproceedings which culminated intoconfirmation of demand for theCENVAT credit wrongly availedwith interest and appropriation ofthe amounts paid by the appellantand imposition of penalty equal tothe wrongly availed CENVATcredit. However, the appellantspaid the amount to the extent ofCENVAT credit which isinadmissible to them as per Rule3(7) prior to issue of notice.Accordingly, it was held that thepenalty shall stand reduced to 25%if the penalty is paid within 30 daysfrom the date of receipt of thisorder, in view of the fact thatappellant has already paid duty andinterest. Penalty shall be equal tothe amount of CENVAT creditavailed by the appellant only if notpaid within 30 days. [M/s DiamondTools Pvt Ltd Vs CCEx, Rajkot2012-TIOL-237-CESTAT-Ahm]

5. Refund of service tax: The issuebefore the Tribunal is whetherrefund of service tax paid onTechnical Testing & Analysis usedin manufacture of final products,both for exports and domestic areais admissible. Appellants had fileda claim of refund of CENVATcredit under Rule 5 of the CENVATCredit Rules, 2004. Further asadvised by the Department, theappellants filed subsequent refundclaims for the same amount underNotification No. 41/2007 dated06.10.2007 which have beenrejected on the ground of time barand non-compliance with theconditions of the said notification.The contention of the departmentis, no refund can be granted underRule 5 of the CENVAT CreditRules, 2004, as there is a separatescheme notified under Notification

No. 41/2007 and one of theconditions under the saidnotification also states that refundof service tax paid on such specifiedservices cannot be claimed exceptunder that notification vide clause(f) of the First Proviso to the saidNotification. The Tribunalremanded the matter to the originalauthority to consider the originalclaim of the appellants for refund ofunutilized credit of technical testingand analysis service with referenceto the provisions of CENVAT CreditRules, 2004, and Notification No.5/2006 issued under the said Rulesand held that the Notification No.41/2007 dated 06.10.2007 has beenissued under Section 93 of theFinance Act, 1994, whichempowers the Government to grantexemption from payment of servicetax. As such, the Notification issuedunder Section 93 of the FinanceAct, 1994, or a conditionincorporated in such a notificationcannot put a bar on credit allowedor refund of unutilized creditallowed under the Rules madeunder a different enactment, that is,the Central Excise Act, 1944, anda different provision namelySection 94 of the Finance Act,1994. There has to be a restrictionplaced on the scope of refunds tobe granted under Rule 5. Suchrestriction has to be built in eitherunder Rule 5 itself or under anindependent provision under theCENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Sincethere is no restriction placed underthe said Rules, the appellant cannotbe prevented from claiming refundof unutilized CENVAT credit inrespect of any input or inputservices, if such refund is otherwisedue. [M/s Spel Semiconductors Ltdvs CCEx, Chennai 2012-TIOL-210-Cestat-Mad]

10April2012

Customs

6. Validity of summons issuedunder Section 108 of Custom Act,1962: The petitioner is engaged ina business of purchase of RedSander Wood in the auctionsconducted by the variousDepartments of the StateGovernments and sale of suchwood. He was detained by theofficers of the Directorate ofRevenue Intelligence with asuspicion that he is involved insmuggling of red sander wood andrecorded statement from petitionerunder undue influence, coercion andthreat doubt. Later, the petitionerhad received summons underSection 108 of the Customs Act,1962 which stated that the petitionerwas connected with the act ofsmuggling of red sander wood toDubai and other places and that heshould appear before the respondentto give evidence and to producedocuments or things related to thesaid acts. The petitioner preferredthe writ petition, before High Court,under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India contending that therespondent does not have theauthority or power to issuesummons under Section 108 of theCustoms Act, 1962 and thesummons issued by the respondentis arbitrary, illegal and void in theview that he has been arrayed as anaccused in the criminal case and thathe cannot be compelled to giveevidence in connection with the saidcase.

In this regard, it is held that thedepartment has the power tosummon any person under Section108 of the Customs Act, 1962, butan accused cannot be compelled togive evidence against himself. It isthe duty of the person so summonedto state the truth before the officer

concerned which shall be voluntaryin nature. But if the statements hadbeen obtained from him undercompulsion, threat, duress or byother similar means, such statementsmade by the person concernedcannot be used as evidence againsthim, as provided under Article 20(3)of the Constitution of India.However, if the statements are madeby the person concerned,voluntarily, there is no prohibitionto use such statements against him.[A T Maideen vs The SeniorIntelligent Officer Directorate ofRevenue Intelligence Delhi ZonalUnit, New Delhi 2012-TIOL-184-HC-Mad-Cus]

7. Duty drawback for the goods re-exported later than two yearsfrom the date of import: Thepetitioner had imported aconsignment and paid applicableduty of customs, wherein the nameof the person exporting was notmatching with the name as givenin bill of entry. The petitionerapplied for permission to re-exportthe consignment for which theapproval was given after 22 monthsand the consignment was re-exported at that stage, viz., laterthan two years from the date ofimport because of lapses and thetime taken by the Custom authoritiesto grant permission for re-export.The petitioner claimed refund ordrawback of customs duty paidwhich was denied on the ground thatthe re-export had been made beyondtwo years. The Honourable HighCourt in the given case held andordered the refund with interest andcosts as the goods had not beenimported into the country there is noquestion of assessment, demand andpayment of customs duty, thus theduty deposited by the petitionershould be refunded. Further, the

importers to inconvenience since thelapses and default have been on thepart of the respondents. [Em PeeSyndichem Pvt Ltd Vs Union ofIndia & ANR 2012-TIOL-133-HC-Del-CUS]

Service Tax:

8. Payment under wrong ServiceTax Code: The issue before theTribunal is whether the service taxpaid to an incorrect service tax codeis admissible for adjustment againstthe correct code/s. The respondenthad paid service tax under“installation and commissioning”which ought to have been paid under“annual maintenance and repairs”service. It is held dismissing theappeal that considering the merits,giving due regards to facts of thecase and Board’s Circular No.58/7/2003-ST, dated 20.05.03 issuedfrom F.No.159/2/2003-CX-4, theadjustment of payment to the correctaccount code is allowed. Theproceedings initiated against theassessee were accordingly droppedon the grounds of illegality. [CCEx& ST, Vapi Vs M/s Veena IndustriesLTD 2012-TIOL-266-CESTAT-Ahm]

9. The issue before the tribunal iswhether services rendered by a co-operative society is taxable underthe head “Banking and OtherFinancial Services” as definedunder section 65(12) of FinanceAct, 1994. In other words, whethera co-operative society is covered bythe expression “or any other bodycorporate, or any other person”used in sub-section 65 (105) (zm)and sub-section 65 (12).

In this regard, the Tribunal did notagree that the expression as usedin Finance Act, 1994 is for givingexemption to co-operativesocieties. The contention of the

11 April2012


applellant is that the co-operativesocieties are excluded from theexpression “body corporate” asdefined under Section 2(7) of theCompanies Act, 1956 andtherefore, it cannot be brought inby another expression which is notspecific to include co-operativesociety as defined under Section 2(7) of the Companies Act, into theambit of Finance Act, 1994. Byborrowing this expression fromCompanies Act, it brings in all theentities covered by Section 2 (7) ofthe Companies Act, into the ambitof Finance Act, 1994 and if therewas no other expression whichcould have brought co-operativesocieties into the scope of the entryit would have remained outside thescope of Section 65 (105) (zm). Ifthere is an expression which canotherwise cover co-operativesocieties it would be covered. Sothe real point to be examined iswhether the expression “any otherperson” can bring in co-operativesociety. The very fact that Section2 (7) of the Companies Actspecifically excludes co-operativesociety shows that in many respectsco-operative society is of the samegenus as a company. It wasnecessary to keep the co-operativesociety out of the many controls ofthe Companies Act. So, it isspecifically excluded though bothare of the same genus. The fact thatco-operative societies arecontrolled not by the elaborateprocedure of companies Act but bysimilar but simplified controlsthrough different enactments doesnot mean that for taxing the servicesrendered by co-operatives, suchsocieties would be on a differentfooting as compared to servicesprovided by a company unless anduntil such intention is specifically

manifested in the taxing statuteitself. Since no specific exclusion ismade in Finance Act, 1994, co-operative societies will be coveredby the expression “any otherperson” used in Sections65(105)(zm) and 65(12) of FinanceAct, 1994. As per the analysis aboveit is decided that services renderedby a co-operative society is taxableunder the head “Banking and OtherFinancial Services” and hence theservice tax is ordered to be remittedalong with penalty under Section 78.[M/s Madhav Nagrik Sahakari BankLtd Vs Commissioner of CentralExcise, Indore-I 2012-TIOL-234-CESTAT-DEL]

10. Commissioner (Appeals) is notempowered to remand cases: Theissue before the Tribunal is whetherCommissioner of Service Tax(Appeals) has power to pass anorder of remand under Section85(5) 0f the Finance Act,1994. Thefacts were the respondents claimedthe refund of unutilized creditunder Rule 5 of CENVAT CreditRules, 2004 which was rejected bythe original authorities on theground that there was no nexuswith between ‘input services’ and‘output services’ exported andgranted partial refund in othercases. Appellate authority in certaininstances reversed orders oforiginal authorities on nexusbetween input services and outputservices issue and directed forquantification of refund ofunutilized CENVAT credit based onChartered Accountants Certificatesto be produced by assesses whichresulted into Revenue’s appealchallenging appellateCommissioner’s power to remand.It is held by the Tribunal thatCommissioner (Appeals) is notempowered to make an order of

remand under sub-Section (5) ofSection 85 of the Finance Act,1994. Remand order ofCommissioner (Appeals) is setaside and matters were remandedto original authority to decideafresh refund claims afterproviding opportunity to claimantsto produce Chartered Accountantscertificates and re-quantify refundclaims. [CST, Bangalore Vs M/sGE Medical Systems India PvtLTD, 2012-TIOL-311-CESTAT-BANG]

11. Cargo Handling Service vis-à-visGoods transport Service: Theissue before the CESTAT iswhether loading and unloading ofgoods during the provision ofgoods transport services areclassifiable under clause “CargoHandling Service” as held by thedepartment. It is held that the cargohandling activity is incidental totransportation and that handling ortransportation of goods within afactory or mining area does notamount to cargo handling becauseat that stage the goods are not cargowithin the common meaning of theword. Revenue’s attempt to convertsuch services into cargo handlingservice to deny the abatementavailable to value of services ofTransportation of Goods by Roadis too farfetched to find any legalsupport. Further, nothing in thecontracts entered by appellant withservice receiver indicates that thecontracts had any significantcomponent of cargo handling otherthan, transportation. Hence thedemand is set aside accepting thecontention of the appellants thatthey are rendering Transportationservice. [M/s R K TransportCompany Vs Commissioner ofCCEx, Raipur 2012-TIOL-290-CESTAT-Del]

12April2012

Adv

t.

Adv

t.

Adv

t.

DIGITALSIGNATURE

CERTIFICATE

SAFE SCRYPT - SUB CA

We are glad to offer the below Services to

CA, CS & ICWAI Professionals. We offer:

Class II DSC - Applicable for IT Returns,ROC & LLP

Class III DSC - Applicable for all e-Tenders,e-Procurement

We assure you the best Price and Service

(Delivery within half an hour)* in the market.

Buzz us at:

(Prop: S. Gowda)

# 21, Inside Shamrao Compound, Mission Road,Bangalore - 560 027

# 9880133022, 41500916

E mail: [email protected] / [email protected]

13 April2012


IMPORTANT DATES TO REMEMBER DURING THE MONTH OF APRIL 2012

07th April 2012 Income Tax Deposit of TDS/TCS Collected During March 2012

11th April 2012 Excise Monthly Returns for Production and Removal of Goods and CENVAT Credit for March2012

Excise Monthly Returns of Excisable Goods Manufactured & Receipt of Inputs and CapitalGoods by Units in EOU,STP,HTP for March 2012

Excise Monthly Return for Production and Removal of Goods and CENVAT Credit for QuarterEnding 31st March 2012 by SSIs

Excise Monthly returns of Information relating to principal inputs for March 2011 byManufacturer of Specified Goods who paid Duty of Rs.1 Crore or More during financialyear 2011-2012 by PLA/CENVAT/Both.

15th April 2012 Excise Quarterly Returns of CENVAT by First Stage and Second Stage Dealers for Quarterending 31st March 2012.

VAT Filing of VAT 120 under KVAT Laws.

Provident Fund Payment of EPF Contribution for March 2012.

Provident Fund Return of Employees Qualifying to EPF during March 2012.

20th April 2012 Excise Quarterly Return of Production, Removal and CENVAT by Specified Manufacturers ofYarns and Ready Made Garments for the Quarter Ended March 2012.

CST/VAT Monthly Returns (VAT 100) and Payment of CST and VAT Collected During March 2012

21st April 2012 ESI Deposit of ESI Contribution and Collections of March 2012 to the credit of ESI Corporation.

25th April 2012 Service Tax Half yearly Return (ST-3) for the Half Year ending 31st March 2012.

Service Tax Memorandum of Provisional Deposits-Provisional Assessment cases half yearly returns.

EPF Consolidated Statement of Dues and Remittances under EPF and EDLI For March 2012.

EPF Monthly Returns of Employees Joined the Organisation for March 2012.

EPF Monthly Returns of Employees left the Organisation for March 2012.

30th April 2012 Income Tax Payment of TDS on Provisions made on 31st March 2012 U/s 193/194A/194C/D/E/G/H/I/J,195,196 and 196C.

Income Tax Quarterly Return of Non-Deduction of Tax at Source U/s 206A for the Quarter ending31st March 2012.

Excise Annual Statement on Principal Inputs by Assessees who in Financial year 2010-11 PaidRs.10 Lakhs or More as PLA/CENVAT/Both.

Excise Annual Installed Capacity Statement by all assesses.

Service Tax Half yearly Return for Period ending 31st March 2012 by Input Service Distributors.

EPF Annual Returns Showing Month wise Recoveries from Members.

EPF Consolidated Annual Contribution Statement

PT Due date for payment of Professional Tax for the financial year 2012-13.

NOTE: DECLARATION IN FORM 15G AND 15H SHOULD BE FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE7TH DAY OF THE NEXT FOLLOWING THE MONTH IN WHICH THE DECLARATION IS FURNISHED.

14April2012

Coaching Classes: IPCC / PCC & FINAL for November 2012 andCPT for December 2012 Examinations

Admissions open for Subjectwise CoachingIn pursuance of our objective to provide fruitful and quality teaching to our students, we are pleased to inform you that CPT/ IPCC/PCC and FINAL coaching classes will be commencing at the Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI from 01st June 2012 onwards. Theclasses will be concluded by 30th September 2012.Salient features: • Experienced, Expert and Dedicated faculty members • Methodology – Conceptual teaching • Affordable CoachingFee • The journey of CA with Bangalore Branch is that of progress with innumerable activities of knowledge supported and guided byour senior renowned faculty members – resource persons • During the course, amazing, inspiring and motivational sessions andOrientation classes will be conducted • Concessional fee for deserving students.Hence be proud to be part of the Branch by enrolling as a student to become a proud member of this glorious profession.

Fees TimingsCPT Rs.4500/- 05.30pm to 07.30pm (Monday to Friday)

03.00pm to 07.30pm (Saturday)07.30am to 12Noon (Sunday)

IPCC / PCC / FINAL Rs.10000/- for Both Groups 06.30am to 09.30am (Monday to Saturday)Rs.8000/- for Single Group 06.00pm to 09.00pm (Monday to Saturday)Rs.2000/- for Single Subject 07.30am to 05.30pm (Sunday)

Faculty Members: CA. Hariharan K, Chennai, Dr. V. Rajesh Kumar, Bangalore, CA. Sampath Kumar, Bangalore, CA. Shanthi Ganapathi,Chennai, CA.Vijay Raja, Bangalore, CA. Naveen Khariwal G, Bangalore, CA. Shivanand Nayak P, Bangalore,CA. Narendra Jain, Bangalore, CA. Vikas Oswal, Bangalore, CA. Jatin Christopher, Bangalore, CA. Malay Kumar Panda, Bangalore,Mr. J Sundaresan, Bangalore, Mrs. Malathy Sunderrajan, CA. Shruthi B N, CA. B N Ganesh Kumar, Prof. VenkateshwaraKiran I. Bangalore, CA. Lohit Jagdish, CA. Sudheendra H, CA. Jaikumar Nair, Bangalore, Mr. S Gopichandra, Bangalore, Mr. AjayKumar Menon, Bangalore, Mr. S V Madhavan, Bangalore, Mrs. Anita Mehtha, Bangalore and so many other renowned resource persons.

Registration Fees: DD should be drawn in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI” payable at Bangalore.For further details please contact: Tel: 080-30563500 / 511 / 512 / 513 Email: [email protected] / [email protected]

Appeal to members: Members are requested to show their patronage by informing andencouraging their students to join the coaching classes of Bangalore Branch.

MOCK TEST FOR IPCC STUDENTSDay & Date Morning Afternoon

(10am to 1pm) (2pm to 5pm)

Thursday, 05.04.2012 Accounts (GRP-I) Business Law

Friday, 06.04.2012 Cost Accounting Taxation

Saturday, 07.04.2012 Adv. Accounts Auditing(GRP-II)

Fees: Rs.50/- per paper, Rs.150/- for Single GroupRs.250/- for all papers

MOCK TEST FOR FINAL STUDENTSDay & Date Morning Afternoon

(10am to 1pm) (2pm to 5pm)

Monday, 09.04.2012 Accounts St. Fin. Mgmt

Tuesday, 10.04.2012 Auditing Corp. Law

Wednesday, Costing ISCA11.04.2012

Thursday, 12.04.2012 Direct Taxes Indirect Taxes

Fees: Rs.50/- per paper, Rs.150/- for Single GroupRs.300/- for all papersVenue: Bangalore Branch premisesFor registration & payment of fees, please contact:Ms. Rajalakshmi on 080-30563500 / 509

CPT PRE-EXAM CRASH COURSEFOR JUNE 2012 EXAMINATION

We are glad to know that you have registered for CPT Course andwould be appearing for June 2012 exams. Few of you might havetaken coaching classes at our Institute. Many students have requestedus for organizing special classes - Pre-exam crash course for thebenefit of the students appearing in June 2012 examination, apartfrom the regular coaching classes. Accordingly we have fixed upspecial sessions on the following subjects and have invited renownedfaculty members to conduct the sessions.

CPT Pre-Exam Crash Course Timings: 10.00 am to 06.00 pmDate Subject Faculty Members19/05/2012 Mathematics Prof. Rajasekharaiah20/05/2012 Mathematics21/05/2012 Accounts CA. R Sampath Kumar*22/05/2012 Accounts23/05/2012 Mercantile Law CA. Vikas Oswal24/05/2012 Mercantile Law25/05/2012 Economics Prof. Ajay Menon26/05/2012 Economics27/05/2012 Statistics Sri. I Venkateswara Kiran28/05/2012 Statistics

* Confirmation AwaitedCrash Course Fee: Rs.1, 000/- (CASH)Venue: Branch PremisesFor registrations, contact: Ms. Geethanjali (080-30563500/511/512/513), Email: [email protected]

15 April2012


1. Accountants Refresher Course2. Accountants Refresher Training Programme

For whom (Target Audience):

Working accountants (Unqualified)

LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2Junior Accountants Senior Accountants

Refresher Course for Accountants

The daily timings will be as follows:

Timings Sessions

10:00 am to 11:30 am Session 1

11:30am to 11:45am Tea Break

11:45am to 1:15pm Session 2

1:15pm to 02:00pm Lunch Break

02:00pm to 3:30pm Session 3

3:30pm to 3:45pm Tea Break

3:45pm to 5:00pm Session 4

For complete Course Content &Structure visit our websitewww.bangaloreicai.org

Venue: Sessions of the Course will be conducted at the renovated and airconditioned Management Training Centre at the Institute Premises, ‘ICAIBHAWAN’, 16/0, Millers Tank Bed Area, Vasanthnagar, Bangalore – 560052.

Fees: Rs. 5,000/- per participant, Batch Size: 50-60 ParticipantsCheque/DD should be drawn in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI”– payable at Bangalore.

Faculty: The Faculty Members consist of Professionals who are experts in theirrespective subjects. Their blend of theoretical knowledge and practical experiencewill enable the participants to clearly understand the subject and apply theknowledge in their working environment effectively.

Duration: The course will commence by May, 2012 and consist of 5 days of6 hours each divided into 4 sessions a day (i.e., Friday and Saturday in the firstweek and Thursday, Friday and Saturday in the second week).

Course Content & Structure

Section A: Accounting

Part – I - Theoretical1. Importance of Accounting2. Theoretical Framework(i) Meaning and Scope of accounting(ii) Accounting Concepts, Principles and

Conventions(iii) Accounting Standards – concepts,

objectives, benefits(iv) Accounting Policies3. Accounting ProcessBooks of Accounts leading to the preparation ofTrial Balance, Capital and revenue expenditures,Capital and revenue receipts, Contingent assetsand contingent liabilities, Fundamental errorsincluding rectifications thereof.4. Depreciation accounting

Part – II - Practical• Important Aspects in preparation of

Final Accounts foro Sole Proprietors & Partnership Accountso Company Accounts with special

reference to Sch. VI Revised.• Accounting in ERP & Computerized

Environment and assistance in preparationof MIS reporting.

• Use of Cost Centers in Accounting & itsbenefits.

• Facing the Auditors.• Importance of Filing & Documentation.

Section B: Labor Laws & Business LawsCompliance aspects in1. Minimum Wages Act, 1948

2. Payment of Bonus Act, 19653. Payment of Gratuity Act, 19724. Employees’ Provident Funds and

Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 19525. Employees’ State Insurance Act, 19486. Workmen’s Compensation Act, 19237. Factories Act, 19488. Professional Tax Act, 19759. The Companies Act, 195610. The Indian Contract Act , 187211. The Sale of Goods Act, 193012. The India Partnership Act, 193213. The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881Section C: Income Tax1. Important aspects of Income-tax Act, 1961a. Basis of charge of income; rates of taxes

applicable for different types of assesseeb. Concepts of previous year and assessment yearc. Incomes which do not form part of total incomed. Heads of income and the provisions

governing computation of income underdifferent heads

e. Deductions from gross total incomef. Computation of total income and tax payable;g. Provisions concerning advance taxh. Provisions concerning Tax deducted at sourcei. Provisions for filing of return of income.j. Provisions concerning Wealth Tax.2. Important due dates and compliance matters3. Assistance in Assessment proceedings.

Section D: Central Excise, Service Tax and VAT

Central Excise Duty1. Central Excise Act, 1944 and the related

Rules, Circulars and Notifications;

2. Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and therelated Rules.

3. Important due dates and compliance matters

Service Tax4. Service tax – concepts and general principles5. Charge of service tax & taxable services and

various abatement available6. Valuation of taxable services & Point of

Taxation Rules.7. Reverse Charge Mechanism with specific

reference to GTA and Import of Services.8. Payment of service tax and filing of returns9. Important due dates and compliance matters

Value Added Tax10. VAT – concepts and general principles11. Calculation of VAT Liability including input

Tax Credits12. Small Dealers and Composition Scheme13. VAT Procedures.14. Important due dates and compliance matters

Section E: Cost Accounting:1. Introduction to Cost Accounting2. Cost Ascertainment – Different kinds of cost

and cost methods3. Costing for Decision making4. Budgeting5. Controlling Costs6. How to prepare an Estimate / Quotation.

Section F: Banking1. Commercial Banking Terminologies2. Working Capital & Term loans3. Aspects to be considered while filling Bank

Guarantee and Letter of Credit applicationform.

AN APPEAL TO THE MEMBERS

16April2012

Programme Structure:

12 hrsCPE

Workshop on Communication SkillsGet Over Your FEAR of Public Speaking

on 12th, 13th, 16th & 17th April 2012 at Branch Premises Timings: 05.00 pm to 08.00 pm

This is a unique workshop on public speaking beingorganised by the Bangalore Brach. In this workshop theparticipants get to learn the skills required to be aneffective public speaker and overcome the fear of facingthe audience.

What participants would achieve at the end of thecourse?

Introduce yourself effectively.

Write and Deliver speeches effectively.

Be effective in expressions and gestures.

Be effective in voice modulation.

Unique features:

Learning by practice, i.e. by speaking in front ofaudience.

Mentors guide participants to prepare speeches.

Experienced speakers will demonstrate and provideeducational speeches on the projects designed toimprove the communication skills and help thespeakers to prepare and deliver their speeches in aneffective way.

Duration: 12 hours - 4 sessions of 3 hours each per daybetween 05.00pm & 08.00pm

Date & Day Topic

12.04.12, Thursday Why effective communication? Organize your talk. Overcome Nervousness and getting ready for it. Plan to prepare your talk.

13.04.12, Friday How to make an impromptu speech. Evaluation/Playback Round.

16.04.12, Monday Use your body and voice effectively.

17.04.12, Tuesday How to make an effective PPT.

Fees:

Rs. 1,200/- for Members

Rs. 2,400/- for Non-Members

Rs. 600/- for students

Co-ordinator:

CA. Subramanium Chittur

Restricted to 30 participants on First

Come First Serve basis.

For further details please contact:

Ms.Geethanjali, Tel: 080-30563500 / 3513, Email: [email protected] / [email protected]

CA. Dr. A.S. Vishnu Bharathhas been nominated as

Director,Canbank Financial Services Ltd.

(Subsidiary of Canara Bank).

CongratulationsAN APPEAL TO THE MEMBERSSub: XVI Batch of the Course onFinance for Non Finance Executivesunder the aegis of ManagementDevelopment Programmes (MDP)Duration: June 2012 to October 2012Timings: 03.00 pm to 06.30 pm(Only on Saturdays)Course Fee: Rs.15,000/-Course Contents:

Financial Accounts & CompanyAccounts Direct Taxes Financial Analysis Project Reports Indirect taxes

Corporate Finance Cost Accounts

For Whom: The course is open to Non-Finance Executives such as Engineers,Architects, Doctors, Human Resourcepersonnel, Department Heads,Administrators and other executives.

The course does not call for any priorknowledge in Accountancy, Finance andTax Laws. The course coverage will bebasic in all subjects.

We request you to pass on thisinformation to your Clients to avail thebenefits of this course.

Contact Tel: 080-30563500 / 511/ 512E-mail: [email protected] /[email protected]

17 April2012


on Saturday, 28th April 2012 at Branch PremisesTimings: 09.30am to 01.30pm

Speakers : CA. N. NityanandaCA. K. Gururaj AcharyaCA. Ravi Prasad

Schedule VI containing the format & disclosure requirement for companies in India has undergone a sea change. Professionalsboth in practice and in the Industry will have to unlearn the old format & its contents and learn the new avatar of Schedule VIin depth. To add spice to these developments, the companies bill has been introduced with a paradigm shift on Accounts /Audit related provisions. To evaluate these new waves in the corporate law practice this workshop is designed.

Delegate Fees: Rs. 300 /- for Members, Rs.200/- for students

DD/Cheque should be drawn in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI” payable at Bangalore.Please mention your name, membership number and contact details at the back of the cheque/demand draft.

For further details please contact:

Ms. Geethanjali D, Tel: 080-30563500 / 3513, Email: [email protected]

Seminar on ‘Implementation & Issues Relating toRevised Schedule VI’ 4 hrs

CPE

16 hrsCPE

on 16th, 17th, 19th & 20th April 2012 at Branch PremisesTimings: 04.00 pm to 08.15 pm

In recent years, due to Globalization and privatization there has been significant growth in the Economy. Thereis a heavy flow of cross border investments and this in turn has given rise to many issues in Taxation.

Hence, this workshop is being organized, enabling the members to acquire specialized knowledge in the area ofInternational Taxation.

The details of the workshop are given below:

Date & Day Topics Speaker Topics Speaker4.00 pm to 6.00 pm 6.15 pm to 8.15 pm

16.04.2012 Sec.5,6,9,44 BB, CA.H.Padamchand Article 1 to 4 CA.K K ChythanyaMonday 44 DA,115 A Khincha*

17.04.2012 PE-Article 5 and CA.Narendra Jain Royalties and FTS Yet to be confirmedTuesday BP Article 7

19.04.2012 Capital Gains, Interest CA.Rishi Harlalka DPA Salaries CA. KaushikThursday and Immovable Properties Mukherjee*

20.04.2012 IPS, other Income CA.Subramanian Section 195 CA.SudhindraFriday

*Confirmation awaited

Delegate fee: for Members: Rs.1,000 /- Non Members: Rs.2,000/- Students: Rs.500/-Cash/cheque in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI”

For further details please contact: Ms.Geetanjali D, Tel: 080-30563500/513, E-mail: [email protected]

Workshop on ‘International Taxation’

18April2012

12 hrsCPE

on 23rd, 24th & 26th April 2012 at Branch PremisesTimings: 04.00 pm to 08.15 pm

As we are aware, Service Tax is one of the significant areas of practice wherein CAs are to be updated. In thisregard, a series of Workshop on “Service Tax” has been designed for the entire year to keep the members updatedand to gain an in-depth knowledge in Service Tax.

The details of the Workshop are appended below:

Date & Day Topics Speaker Topics Speaker4.00 pm to 6.00 pm 6.15 pm to 8.15 pm

23.04.2012 Section 97 CA.N Anand Valuation Rules CA.Naveen RajMonday Except WCT Purohit

24.04.2012 Valuation WCT CA.Sai Prasad Recent Case Laws and Mr. K S NaveenTuesday Issues under Valuation Kumar

26.04.2012 Point of CA.G.Lakshminarayan Issues under Point of CA.Madhur HarlalkaThursday Taxation Rules Taxation

Co-ordinator: CA.Naveen Raj Purohit

Delegate fee : for Members : Rs.750 /- Non Members: Rs.1,500/- Students: Rs.400/-

Cash/cheque in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI”

For further details please contact:Ms.Geetanjali D, Tel: 080-30563500/513, E-mail: [email protected]

Workshop on “Service Tax Valuation”

Workshop on Practical Issues in TDS & Efilingon Thursday, 03rd May & Friday, 04th May 2012 at Branch Premises

Timings: 04.00pm to 08.00pm

Topics : Day 1 : 1) Practical Issues in TDS - Salary , Interest, Contract Payment,Commission or Brokerage, Professional / Technical Fee

Day 2 : 1) ETDS filing & TDS Credit, Non Resident Payment & Other issues2) Panel Discussion on TDS – Practical Issues

Speakers are yet to be finalized.

Co-ordinator: CA. D. R. Venkatesh

Delegate Fees: Rs. 500/- for Members

Rs. 1,000/- for Non-Members

Rs. 250/- for students

For further details please contact:Ms. Geethanjali D, Tel: 080-30563500 / 3513, Email: [email protected]

8 hrsCPE

DD/Cheque should be drawn in favour of “Bangalore Branchof SIRC of ICAI” payable at Bangalore. Please mention yourname, membership number and contact details at the back of thecheque/demand draft.

21 April2012


22April2012

newsletter for the month of april 2012

Documents