1 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

2March2011

3 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

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 front ` 24,000/-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. Venkatesh Babu T.R.

Sub Editor : CA. Ravindranath S.N.

CALENDAR OF EVENTS - March & April 2011Date/Day Topic /Speaker Venue/Time CPE Credit

01.03.11 Analysis of Union Budget-2011 in association with Chowdaiah Memorial Hall,Tuesday Bangalore Chamber of Industry & Commerce Malleshwaram,

CA. T V Mohandas Pai & BangaloreCA. Padamchand Khincha - Moderators 04.30pm to 08.00pm

09.03.11 HR Strategies in CA Firms Branch PremisesWednesday CA. Guruprasad M 06.00pm to 08.00pm

12.03.11 Clause by Clause Discussion on Finance Bill 2011 Jnana Jyothi Convention Centre,Saturday Delegate Fee: `̀̀̀̀ 750/- Central College Campus,

Palace Road, Bangalore Details at page no: 15 10.00am to 05.00pm

16.03.11 Interactive Meeting with CPC Branch PremisesWednesday (Income Tax) Officials 05.30pm to 08.30pm

Mr.Sanjai Verma, CIT(CPC) Details at page no: 17

19.03.11 Seminar on “Bank Branch Audit” Hotel Le- Meridian,Saturday Delegate Fee: `̀̀̀̀ 1500/- Sankey Road, Bangalore

Details at page no: 17 09.30am to 06.00pm

19.03.11 Meet the President & Vice President Branch PremisesSaturday CA. G. Ramaswamy, President, ICAI 06.30pm to 08.00pm

CA. Jaydeep Narendra Shah, Vice President, ICAI

23.03.11 IFRS - Financial Instruments & Accounting for Branch PremisesWednesday Foreign Currency Transactions 06.00pm to 08.00pm

CA. Arun Ramasubramanian

26.03.11 Karnataka State Budget Analysis & Branch PremisesRecent Notifications in KVAT Act 10.00am to 01.00pm

Saturday CA. S Venkataramani & CA. Sanjay M Dhariwal

30.03.11 Quick view on basel II norms - Role of Branch PremisesWednesday Branch Auditors - Verification of Advances with 06.00pm to 08.00pm

special reference to IRAC normsCA. S Ananda Krishna

06.04.11 Time Management & Work Life Balance Branch PremisesWednesday Sri. K Gururaja, Trainer & Counsellor 06.00pm to 08.00pm

13.04.11 Usage of Tally ERP9-Auditor Edition Branch PremisesWednesday Mr. Vjaya Sarathy 06.00pm to 08.00pm

3hrs

6hrs

3hrs

6hrs

2hrs

3hrs

2hrs

2hrs

2hrs

2hrs

4March2011

TAX UPDATES JANUARY 2011CA. Chythanya K.K., B.com, FCA, LL.B., Advocate

VAT, CST, ENTRY TAX,PROFESSIONAL TAX

PARTS DIGESTED:

a) 2010 70 Kar. L. J. Part 1

b) 36 VST – Part 5

c) 37 VST – Part 1 to 4

d) 5 GST – Part 1

Reference/Description

2011 (70) Kar. L.J. 1 (Tri.) (DB):Lease Plan India Ltd., Bangalore v.State of Karnataka

In the instant case the KAT dealt with3 aspects. In the context of goodswhich had been subjected to tax underSection 5 of the KST Act and inrespect of which right to use wastransferred by assessee-company toits customers in terms of agreemententered into with them prior to 1-4-2005, the Tribunal held that there didnot exist any liability of the assessee-company to pay tax under KVAT Act,which was brought into force witheffect from 1-4-2005, on the monthlyinstalments of lease-rentals receivedfrom 1-4-2005 and onwards. TheTribunal noted that in view of provisoto Section 5-C of the KST Act whichspecifically provides that no tax isleviable under said section if goodsin respect of which right to use istransferred have been subjected to taxunder Section 5 of the said Act,assessee-company is not liable to payany tax under the new Act of 2003 onsuch receipts though received after 1-4-2005. The Tribunal noted thatKVAT Act does not repeal KST Actand does not take away right accruedto assessee under that Act. Evenotherwise the Tribunal observed that

as the taxable event in case of transferof right to use goods takes place, notwhen consideration therefore isreceived by assessee, but whencontract to make such transfer issigned, which in instant case was priorto 1-4-2005, no tax was leviable underthe KVAT Act. With reference toNotification No. FD 300 CSL 2005,dt. 24-10-2005 which provides forconcessional rate of tax in the case ofsale of ‘used cars’, the Tribunal hasheld that to avail the benefit ofconcessional rate, not only that thesale has to be of ‘used’ cars even thepurchases made prior to the said salehas to be of ‘used’ cars. The Tribunalwhile holding so noted that though thereference in the notification is merelyto a dealer without any qualificationthat he should be a dealer in used cars,the wordings in the Notification,namely, “sale of used car” and“purchase of such car”, make it clearthat the purchase and sale should bothbe in respect of used car. In the instantcase the Appellant purchased new carsand the new cars were given on leaseto customers. After expiration of thelease period, the cars reverted to theAppellant as used cars and were sold.The Tribunal observed that theAppellant was the owner of the carsall along and it could not be said thatwhen the customers returned the carsto the Appellant on expiration of leaseperiod, there was any purchase of usedcars by the Appellant.In the contextof imposition of penalty forunderstating tax liability more than5%, the Tribunal held that when theexpression “actual tax liability” meantactual net liability to tax computedafter allowing admissible input tax

credits, then in such a case full amountof output tax demanded withoutadjusting input tax credits admissibleto assessee for relevant period did notrepresent “actual tax liability” ofassessee. The Tribunal held thatpenalty imposed on basis of sucherroneous computation of actual taxliability was liable to be set aside.

2011 (70) Kar. L.J. 39 (HC) (DB):Concorde Hitech City (P) Ltd.,Bangalore v. State of Karnataka &another

In the instant case the assessee wasinvolved in execution of civil workscontract and a registered dealer underthe Act. The assessee made paymentsto sub-contractors for execution ofworks contract, out of which anamount of Rs. 79,57,344/- was paidto unregistered sub-contractors forcarrying out works like constructionof road, market, office, model flat,rock cutting, etc. The High Court ofKarnataka in the context of allowinginput tax credit to a dealer held thatthough the registered dealer is entitledto deduction which is characterised asinput tax from the output tax to beeligible for such deduction, theregistered dealer must pay input taximmediately after such payment, hewould be entitled for deduction of thesame from the output tax. The HighCourt noted that the law does notprovide for book adjustment of thesetwo taxes. The condition precedentfor claiming deduction from theoutput tax is the payment of input taxon such purchase.Further in thecontext of allowance of deductionunder Rule 3(2) in respect of labourand like charges, the High Court heldthat in the instant case where thecontractor had sub-contracted thework and he himself had not directlyincurred any expenditure of the nature

5 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

of ‘labour and like charges’, the samewould have to be regarded asexpenses ‘not ascertainable from thebooks of accounts maintained by thedealer’ and the dealer would beentitled to deduction under Rule3(2)(m), which provides forpercentage deductions wherein theexpenses are not discernible from thebooks of account. The High Courtwhile holding so noted that though theassessee had not spent any amounttowards the labour charges, and hehad entrusted it to the sub-contractorand it was the latter who had spentthe said amount, and the latter was anunregistered dealer and the entirework entrusted is calculated and takeninto account in the accounts of theassessee, the assessee was certainlyentitled to the deduction of labourcharges. As the actual amountexpended was not ascertainable, he isentitled to benefit of 30% of discountas prescribed under law.

2011 (70) Kar. L.J. 76 (SC): IndiaMeters Limited v. State of TamilNadu

In the instant case the Assessee wasengaged in manufacturing andsupplying electric meters toElectricity Board. As per the contractthe price mentioned was as ex-factoryprice, however there was also astipulation that the goods be deliveredby assessee at places specified bybuyer. Having regard to the said factsthe Apex Court held that, since theownership of goods remains with theassessee till the goods were deliveredat destination stations and that theassessee was under an obligation totransport goods to such stations, thefreight and insurance charges incurredby assessee would form part of saleprice and would fall within scope of“taxable turnover”.

2011 (70) Kar. L.J. 113 (HC) (DB):Vasavi Industries, Hiriyur,Chitradurga District v. State ofKarnataka & others

In the instant case there was a delayexceeding 180 days after expiry ofperiod 30 days’ time given forpreferring appeal before the firstAppellate Authority. The High Courtheld that as such delay was beyondAppellate Authority’s jurisdiction tocondone, appeal was rightly rejectedby that authority and also stated thatthere was no interference called forwith order of the said AppellateAuthority.

[2011] 37 VST 94 (Mad) HC: SasthaEnterprises v. Appellate Authority,Commissioner (CT) II (FAC),Chennai & another

In the instant case exemption wasallowed to the Assessee Company inthe original assessment order on thebasis on E1 & C Forms received fromthe original seller and the buyerrespectively. Subsequently theRevenue found out that the said formswere not genuine. In the saidbackdrop the Madras High Court,following the decision of the ApexCourt in the case of State of Madrasv. Radio & Electricals Ltd. [1966] 18STC 222 (SC), held that the AssesseeCompany could not be penalised.While passing the said judgement theHigh Court observed that once thetransaction of transit sale was over,the dealer had no control over thepurchaser and he had no occasion toverify the C form produced from theside of the purchaser. The Courtfurther noted that unless based onconcrete material, it was found outthat the transaction was not true or thedealer was party to the act of fraudsaid to be committed, the question ofdisallowing the exemption already

given would not arise. The Courtfurther went on to add that the onuslay on the Department to proceedagainst the purchaser-dealer for anycontravention of law and no penalaction as warranted against the sellingdealer.Welcome/Interesting decisionwherein the undue onus cast on thetaxpayer has been rightfullyslackened.

[2011] 37 VST 226 (P&H) HC : Cap‘N’ Chops Caterers v. State ofHaryana

In the instant case the Assessee hadentered into a contract for catering,housekeeping and maintenance. TheAO had demanded sales tax on theentire turnover of the assessee and onappeal the same was upheld by thelower authorities. However, the HighCourt held that the entire turnovercould not be taxed and only theturnover relatable to sale was to betaxed after excluding turnover relatingto service. It may be noted thatcatering includes rendering of serviceas well as sale of goods and on thatservice element only service tax couldbe levied and not sales tax.

[2011] 37 VST 290 (Karn) HC:Skyline Constructions & HousingPvt. Ltd. v. Authority for clarification& Advance Rulings, Gandhinagar,Bangalore & another

In the instant case the contractor hadopted to pay tax at compounded rateand was employing sub-contractors.The High Court noted that there wasno sale element in the transactionbetween the contractor and the sub-contractors. The sub-contractors wereregistered and paying tax on worksexecuted by them. In such a case theHigh Court held that the turnover ofsub-contractors was not includible inturnover of principal contractor.

6March2011

INCOME TAX

PARTS DIGESTED:

a) 329 ITR – Part 4 & 5

b)330 ITR – Part 1 to 4

c) 196 Taxman – Part 1 to 4

d)6 ITR(Trib) – Part 5 to 9

e) 7 ITR(Trib) – Part 1 to 5

f) 127 ITD – Part 9

g) 128 ITD – Part 1 to 4

h)42-B BCAJ – Part 4

i) 4 International Taxation –Part 1

Reference/Description

[2011] 330 ITR 57 (Cal) HC:Raghunath Exports (P) Ltd. v. CIT

In the context of determining theturnovers for the purpose of deductionunder Section 80HHC, the CalcuttaHigh Court held that the surplusowing to difference between Indiancurrency equivalent at time of raisinginvoices and Indian currencyequivalent at time of realization waspart and parcel of export turnover andtotal turnover.

[2011] 330 ITR 93 (Guj) HC:LMP Precision Engg. Co. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT (Assessment)

In the instant case the revised returnsfiled after survey operations showedconcealment of income and thereforethe Gujarat High Court held that theimposition of penalty was valid.TheHigh Court had dealt with the law onthe subject of treating a revised returnof income as voluntary or otherwise.The High Court had observed thatmerely because a return was revisedthat fact by itself could not lead to anypresumption as to concealment in theoriginal return of income, because theLegislature itself had provided forfurnishing a revised return in case ofany omission in the original return.Although such omission had to beinadvertent and bona fide. If theomission was intentional the revised

return could not absolve an assessee.The fact that the Department hadinitiated certain inquiries per se wouldnot be sufficient to treat the revisedreturn as not being voluntary. Thesame would depend on the facts ofeach case considering the stage atwhich the investigation hadprogressed, the subject-matter ofinvestigation by the Department, andthe evidence available in the courseof such investigation.

[2011] 330 ITR 175 (Bom) HC:CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.

In the context of interpreting themeaning of the term ‘export turnover’for the purpose of Section 10A, theBombay High Court held that theexport turnover, in the numeratormust have the same meaning as theexport turnover which is a constituentelement of the total turnover in thedenominator. The High Court notedthat the Legislature had provided adefinition of the expression “exportturnover” in Explanation 2 to Section10A by which the expression the saidterm was defined to mean theconsideration in respect of export bythe undertaking of articles, things orcomputer software received in, orbrought into India by the assessee inconvertible foreign exchange but soas not to include inter alia freight,telecommunication charges orinsurance attributable to the deliveryof the articles, things or softwareoutside India. The High Court heldthat therefore in computing the exportturnover the Legislature had made aspecific exclusion of freight andinsurance charges.In the matter ofdisallowance of certain expenditureand the consequent impact the samehad on computing the deductionunder Section 10A, the High Courtnoted that the plain consequence ofthe disallowance and the add back thathad been made by the AO was anincrease in the business profits of the

assessee. The High Court held that thecontention of the Revenue that incomputing the deduction underSection 10A the addition made onaccount of the disallowance of theprovident fund/ESIC payments oughtto be ignored could not beaccepted.The interpretation in thecontext of disallowance ofexpenditure seems to be just dessertsas against the Department and thestand taken by assessees’ all alongseems vindicated. It has always beenthe wont of Department (as also theassessees?!) to interpret provisions ina half-baked manner – to juice out theaspect propitious to it and winnowwhat is not monetarily beneficial toit!

[2011] 330 ITR 226 (SC) : CIT v.Tulsyan Nec Ltd.

In the context of determination ofadvance tax payable in a case wherethe assessee was entitled to certainMAT credit, the Apex Court has heldthat although Section 209(1)(d) doesnot make any specific provision eitherbefore or after the amendmentscarried out by the Finance Act, 2006to the effect that an assessee is entitledto set off the tax credit that would beavailable in terms of Section115JAA(1), while computing thequantum of advance tax that is to bepaid it must follow that an assesseewould be entitled to do so otherwiseit results in absurdity, viz, that anassessee pays advance tax on thefooting that it is not entitled (when infact it is so entitled as discussedabove) to the credit and thereafterclaims a refund of such advance taxpaid as a consequence of the setoff.This decision of the apex courtputs an end to controversies raised bythe Revenue. MAT credit is to betaken into account before evendetermining the advance tax liability.The contrary prescription in thereturn form is not valid.

7 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

[2011] 330 ITR 338 (Ker) HC : CCIT& another v. Jimmichan M. Varicatt

In the instant case the Kerala HighCourt dealt with notification no. 400/234/95/IT dated 23-05-1996, whichempowers the Chief Commissioner towaive interest under Sections 234A,234B and 234C in certaincircumstances stipulated therein. TheHigh Court noted that clauses (a) and(e) of the said notification dealt withthe same subject, that is circumstancesfor waiver of interest under Section234A. However, for waiver of interestpayable under Sections 234B and234C, application had to beconsidered with specific reference toclauses (b), (c) and (d) of thenotification. The High Court furtherobserved that while clause (a) refersto disability of an assessee from filingreturn on account of search andseizure and retention of books ofaccount, clause (e) deals with othercases where parties were disabledfrom filing of returns for unavoidablereasons, may be party happens to beout of India, happens to be sick andlaid up, etc. In the said circumstancethe High Court held that the findingof the learned single judge that clause(e) was a condition, satisfaction ofwhich, entitles the assessee to claimwaiver of interest under Sections234B and 234C of the Act, was nottenable, because it only lays down acondition for waiver of interest undersection 234A of the Act. The HighCourt therefore held that satisfactionof the condition under clause (e) doesnot entitle the assessee for waiver ofinterest under Section 234B andSection 234C.

[2011] 330 ITR 340 (Bom) HC: CITv. Larsen & Toubro Ltd.

In the instant case the Bombay HighCourt held that where the Assesseehad deducted and deposited TDS ontime but had filed the TDSCertificates during assessment

proceedings, interest under Section244A could not be denied to theAssessee.

[2011] 330 ITR 363 (SC) : IndoRama Synthetics (I.) Ltd. v. CIT

In the matter of determination of bookprofits under Section 115JB, the ApexCourt has held that the reduction ofnet profit by amount withdrawn fromrevaluation reserve had to be madeonly if the said amount had beenadded back in year of creation ofrevaluation reserve.With great respectto the Apex Court, this decisionalthough recognises the MAT liabilityon real profits has eventually upheldthe liability on fictitious profits.

[2011] 330 ITR 440 (Delhi)HC[2011] 196 Taxman 169 [2010]8 taxmann.com 145 (Delhi): CIT v.Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd.

In the instant case the assessee was aNBFC which had advanced certainInter-Corporate Deposits (ICDs) to aCompany ‘S’. Since no interest couldbe received on such deposits for morethan 6 months and also as per Section45Q of the RBI Act and the PrudentialNorms issued in regard to revenuerecognition, the assessee treated thesaid ICD as NPA and did not showinterest income as the same was notrealisable. The Delhi High Court onthe said facts held that having regardto the precarious financial position ofthe borrower wherein even theprincipal amount was not recoverableit was correct to infer that the interestincome thereupon had not accrued.Further having regard to thePrudential Norms since the ICD hadbecome NPA the interest incomecould not be accrued. The Court alsoemphasised the fact that the assesseeCompany being a NBFC was boundby the RBI Act and the adjunctPrudential Norms issued vide thepowers under the said Act. The Courtalso noted that the assessee wasindubitably bound to follow the

accounting principle as mandatedunder AS 9. The High Court was ofthe view that the question whether realincome has materialised to theassessee had to be considered withreference to commercial and businessrealities of the situation in which theassessee had been placed and not withreference to the system of accounting.Further while arriving at a judgementas aforesaid that fact that profits havegot to be computed after deductinglosses/expenses incurred for business,even though such losses/expensesmay not be admissible under section30 to 43D of the Income-tax Act,unless such losses/expenses areexpressly or by necessary implicationdisallowed by the Act, was alsodiscussed. The real income theorywhich is engrained in the PrudentialNorms for recognition of revenue byNBFC has been borrowed to establishthe true income of the assessee.Thedecision renders the harmoniousinterpretation of the various inter-related Acts much to the relief of theinterested parties. Though it may benoted that neither the PrudentialNorms nor the RBI Act override theprovisions of the IT Act in its forte,the commercial reality has beenborrowed therefrom.

[2011] 330 ITR 470 (SC): JCIT v.Rolta India Ltd.

In the instant case the Apex Courtwhile holding that Circular No. 13 of2001 dt. November 9, 2001, whichdealt with the ‘Liability for paymentof advance tax under new MATprovisions of section 115JB’, had noapplication in the instant case, wenton to hold that interest under Section234B could be charged on taxcalculated on book profits underSection 115JA/115JB as well.

[2011] 196 Taxman 276 [2010] 8taxmann.com 239 (Kar.) :CIT v.Indian Institute of Management

In the instant case, the High Court in

8March2011

the context of determining thesubjective qualification under Section10(23C)(iiiab) being ‘substantiallyfinanced’, for the purpose ofdetermination of the eligibility of theAssessee for exemption under the saidSection, held that, where in a case theassessee’s total income from allsources was Rs. 20.61 lakhs, out ofwhich a sum of Rs. 7.80 lakhs, whichrepresented 37.85%, was financed bythe Central Government, othersources of income being tuition fee,donations, etc., the same would haveto be regarded as substantial financingby the Government and the assesseewas eligible for deduction under thesaid Section. The Assessee in theinstant case is an educationalinstitution.

[2010] 6 ITR (Trib) 502 (Delhi) :Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO

The instant case dealt with theTransfer Pricing provisions. In the TPreport filed by the assessee before theAO, the comparables were chosenafter extensive exercise and a netprofit of 2.8 % was adopted as thearm’s length margin for benchmarking the trading activity of theassessee. The TPO had bifurcated thetrading activity into two separatedivisions of consumer productdivision and system product divisionbut had assumed the consolidatedprofit margin of 2.48 % of thecomparable as the common netmargin indicator. The TPO had alsoreworked the financials of theassessee without making anycorresponding adjustment in the profitlevel indicator of the comparablecases. The Delhi Tribunal held that thesaid approach of the TPO was notunder the prescribed Rule 10B. TheTribunal also noted that if thetransactions of both the divisionshaving international transactions asfound by the TPO in his report wereconsolidated as one trading activity,

the operating profit margin of salesworked out to 3.95 % which exceededthe arm’s length margin of 2.48 %.Thus, the Tribunal held that theassessee’s international transactionwas at arm’s length.Further in thematter of incurrence of certainexpenditure the Tribunal noted thatthe advertisement expenses incurredby the assessee was in the normalcourse of its business operation andthe same formed part of operatingexpenses of the assessee. The Tribunalheld that when the assessee was inreceipt of reimbursement of suchexpenses from the associatedenterprise which reimbursementunder the accounting policy of theassessee had been shown under theseparate head of operating revenueinstead of netting of the operatingexpenses, there was no justificationfor treating it as a non-operatingreceipt.In the matter of hiring andfiring of people and using data ofmore than 2 years and theapplicability of the proviso to Rule10B(4), the Tribunal held that the saidRule would come into play and wouldallow the assessee to take the averageof previous two years along with thecurrent year for working profit levelindicator of the tested party. TheTribunal while holding so observedthat it is manifest that hiring and firingof people is a long-term affair andcannot be done overnight. Similarly,three years’ average would also betaken into account for its comparablesso that like can be compared with thelike. The Tribunal held that theproviso to Rule 10B(4) clearlypermitted the same.

[2010] 6 ITR (Trib) 604 (Mumbai)[SB]: Sulzer India Ltd. v. JCIT

In the instant case the deferred salestax liability was treated as loan by theState Government and deduction wasallowed in terms of Circular no. 674/29-12-1993 under Section 43B on

deemed basis. The liability on thesame was settled on payment of netpresent value computed in accordancewith formula prescribed in State salestax law. The Mumbai Tribunal notedthat the same was not a case of waiveror acceptance of lesser sum byGovernment. There was no remissionor cessation of liability and thereforeheld that the difference between netpresent value and future liabilitycould not be taxed as deemed income.

[2010] 6 ITR (Trib) 722 (Delhi) :Rolls Royce Industrial Power Ltd.v. Assist. CIT

In the instant case the Delhi Tribunalin the matter of classification of aparticular transaction has held that,taking a view that contract was notone for rendering service for purposeof certificate of nil deduction of taxat source, the Department was notentitled to take contrary stand inassessment where there was nochange in the facts.Further theTribunal, having regard to Article 26of the DTAA, which dealt with ‘non-discrimination’ noted that the assesseewhich was an non-resident companyand undertook a works contract wouldbe discriminated against if subjectedto tax on gross basis at the rate of 30% by artificially invoking Section44D read with section 115A of theAct, because a domestic companydoing exactly the same works contractwould be taxed at the rate of 2 %under Section 194C of the Act andalso would be subject to tax on its netprofits. Accordingly the Tribunal heldthat the assessee was entitled toprotection of Article 26 of the DTAA.The Tribunal held that the net profitwas to be determined in accordancewith the provisions in the Act fordetermining profits and gains ofbusiness from Sections 28 to 43B.TheTribunal has also held that where theentire income of non-resident wasliable to deduction of tax at source,

9 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

as per Section 195, no interest waschargeable under Section 234B.In thematter of filing of tax audit reportunder Section 44AB, the Tribunalheld that a corporate entity is liablefor tax as a single entity by clubbingall income that arises to it fromvarious sources against same head ofincome or under various heads ofincome. Such being the case theAssessee was not bound to file taxaudit reports for each separatebusiness. The Tribunal noted thatthere was no provision in the Actwhich required a tax payer to file taxaudit reports for each separatebusiness that it does.

[2010] 6 ITR (Trib) 824(Ahmedabad): Bank ofMaharashtra v. ITO

The Ahmedabad Tribunal in thecontext of Section 194A held thatdeduction of tax not obligatory in theinstant case of the Appellant Bankwherein notional provision for halfyearly interest on account ofcumulative deposit was shown in thegeneral ledger and the same wasreversed on next working day, thishaving been done i.e. the interestcredited to provisioning account formacro-monitoring. The Tribunal heldthat in the said case it could not beclaimed that interest was due orpayable on that day and therefore TDSunder Section 194A would notapply.The judgement considers theidiosyncrasies involved in differentbusiness set-ups and the need toharmoniously apply the tax provisionswhich is otherwise always atloggerheads with other commercialpractices born out of business niceties.

[2011] 7 ITR (Trib) 41 (Cochin) :S. Rahumathulla v. Assist. CIT

In the instant case the assessee was adistributor of service products ofBharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., and hadpurchased SIM Cards by way of partcash payment. The AO disallowed 20% of the expenditure under Section

40A(3). The assessee’s contentionwas that the purchases had to be madeon account of paucity of cards, fromthe open market and that the sellershad insisted on cash payments. TheCochin Tribunal while passing itsjudgement observed that the serviceprovider in order to eliminate orminimise the risk of default or forliquidity constraints or to takebusiness advantage of its dominantposition may require the distributorto make an upfront payment againstall the SIM cards taken delivery of fordistribution. Therefore though it hadbeen classified as purchase in thebooks of the distributor, they were notessentially so, the SIM cards being not“goods” in the real sense. Similarlythere was no purchase of any servicesby the distributor on assuming thepossession of the service products.The Tribunal noted that theacquisition of SIM cards by thedistributor only equips it to performits part of the services required to beextended to customers to enableinitialisation of the servicerelationship and then its maintenance.The service products sourced fromoutside sources and the serviceprovided to the customers was onlyon behalf of the service provider. Theassessee did not make any purchaseseither of goods or services on theacceptance of the delivery of the SIMcards or other service products andtherefore, no expenditure wasincurred by the assessee as adistributor even as the transactionmay be classified as such in itsaccounts, which could not beconclusive as to the nature of thetransaction. The Tribunal thereforeheld that there was no scope for theapplication of the provision of Section40A(3) in the facts and circumstancesof the case. There was no question ofpurchase by the franchisee-distributorand the income arising was only inthe nature of a commission orremuneration against services

rendered. The Tribunal while passingthe judgement relied on its ownjudgement in the case of VodafoneEssar Cellular Ltd. v. ACIT [2009]317 ITR (AT) 234 (Cochin).

[2011] 7 ITR (Trib) 468(Visakhapatnam) : M. SivaParvathi & others v. ITO

In the instant case the assesseeacquired certain property by way ofinheritance. The assessee had enteredinto an agreement to sell the saidproperty prior to the introduction ofSection 50C (dealing with ‘stampvalue’ in certain cases of sale ofcapital assets). However there was adelay in registering the sale deed dueto genuine reasons and the transactionwas completed after the introductionof the said Section. Having regard tothe said facts the VishakhapatnamTribunal held that the Section 50Cwas not applicable in the instant case.Further the Tribunal also held that anyexpenditure incurred in removingencumbrance to transfer was eligiblefor deduction while computing capitalgains. It was also held that theindexation would be with referenceto the year in which the previousowner had acquired the asset.

[2011] 128 ITD 24[2010] 8taxmann.com 286 (Mum.) :Ms. Nita A. Patel v. ITO

In the instant case in the matter ofcomputation of capital gains, theMumbai Tribunal has held that as perExplanation (iii) to Section 48, indexedcost of acquisition of a property has tobe calculated with reference to datewhen assessee acquired ownershiprights over property and for the saidpurpose physical ownership orphysical possession of property wasnot necessary. Further the Tribunal alsoheld that the amount paid to tenant forgetting possession of property couldbe taken into account for calculatingindexed cost of improvement underExplanation (iv) to Section 48.

10March2011

A. Relief and reform measures

under Karnataka Valued Added

Tax

EXEMPTION: - Following are the

ax exemption proposed

i] One year tax exemption proposed

to continue on sale of paddy, rice

wheat, pulses and products of rice

and wheat.

ii] Coconut [excluding copra] will be

exempted from tax

iii] De-oiled rice bran will be

exempted from tax. Bran is

widely used as a major component

in foods for animals.

iv] Tax on leasing of feature films and

sale of copy rights relating to

feature films will be exempted.

The Budget has proposed to

exempt the tax on leasing of FF

as well as copyrights on FF.

REDUCTION: - On the following

goods tax reductions is proposed

i] Barbed wire reduced from 13.5%

to 5%

ii] The reduced rate of tax on sale of

school bags costing upto Rs.200/

- each at 5% proposed to extent

school bag costing upto Rs.500/-

each [Sl.No. 23 of of Notification

No. FD 82 CSL 10(III),

Bangalore, dated 31-3-2010]

COMMERCIAL TAXPROPOSALS IN KARNATAKASTATE BUDGET 2011CA Sanjay Dhariwal MVasanthkumar J, B.com, LLB

iii] Tax on all kitchen utensils will be

reduced from 13.5% to 5%

iv] Tax on caps will be reduced from

13.5% to 5%

INCREASE IN TAX RATE:-

i] Lower rate of tax on declared is

proposed to increase to the

maximum rate prescribed Under

Section 15 of the CST Act.

ii] Proposed to increase tax rate from

1% to 2% on jewellery and articles

of gold and other noble metals,

precious and semi-precious

stones. However bullion and

specie shall be taxable at 1%

iii] Proposed to increase general rate

of tax from 13.5% to 14%

OTHERS:-

i] Proposed to extend refund of input

tax paid on purchases for official

use to multilateral financial

institutions. Notificaiton No. FD

126 CSL 2009(I), Bangalore,

dated 23-10-2009 grants refund of

tax paid on purchases to the Asian

Development Banks for official

use.

ii] Extension of time from 120 days

to 240 days for stay of recovery

of disputed tax in appellate

authority under section 64(4)(d).

iii] Reduction in time limit for

conducting assessment under

section 38 or re-assessment under

section 39 from 5 years to 4 years.

iv] Increase in total turnover limit

from sixty lakhs rupees to one

crore rupees for having accounts

audited from the prescribed

persons under section 31(4) of the

Act

v] Abolition of submission of

agreements by contractors

entering into a written agreement

during any tax period for

executing, partly or wholly, a

works contract of construction of

a building or other civil works

either by himself or through

another require to submit a copy

of such agreement within the end

of the subsequent tax period to the

prescribe authority [LVO]

vi] Increased penalty for penalty for

clandestine transport of goods

taxable at lower rate

vii] Interest rate will be increased

from 15% pa to 18% pa under

section 37 for the delayed

payment of tax.

B. Relief under Entertainment Tax

i] Exemption from registration of

feature films under Entertainment

Tax Act.

C. Relief under Luxury Tax

i] Provision for payment of

composition amounts in lieu to

regular tax on luxuries provided

by home-stay units.

11 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

SERVICE TAX

The appellants are in the businessof producing output service, which isentirely exported and, therefore, noservice tax is payable on the same.The appellants had applied for refundof service tax paid on input serviceused for providing output servicewhich is exported. The same wasrejected on the ground that the refundclaim related to the period prior to theregistration. However, it was held thatas per section 69 of the Finance Act,1994, only a person who is liable topay service tax is required to applyfor registration. Since the appellantshave exported their entire outputservice, they were not required to payservice tax and hence the law does notmandate them to take registration.Hence the refund claim cannot berejected on the ground of non-registration, if the refund is otherwiseadmissible. Accordingly, theimpugned orders passed by theauthorities were set aside and thematter was remanded to the originalauthority. [Textech International (P)Limited vs. Commissioner of ServiceTax, Chennai. 2011 (21) S.T.R 289(Tri – Chennai)]

The Commissioner (Appeals) haddenied the credit on group accidentinsurance holding that the same is notcovered under Rule 2 of the CenvatCredit Rules, 2004 as such service has

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

no relation either with manufacturingactivity or business of the appellants.The appellants contended that thegroup accident insurance was takenfor the employees who are involvedin manufacturing activity to avoid anyliability of accidents that occur duringthe course of manufacturing.However, considering the fact that inthe own case of the appellantsreported in 2010 (17) S.T.R 178 (Tri– Delhi), the Tribunal had allowed thecredit on group insurance which, hasnot been challenged by theDepartment. Based on the same, thecredit on group accident insurancewas allowed. [H.E.G Limited vs.Commissioner of Central Excise,Raipur. 2011 (21) S.T.R 300 (Tri –Delhi)]

The learned Commissioner heldthat the expenses such as godownrent, depreciation, pest control, fireextinguisher, internet, house keeping,telephone expenses, tax, etc.,reimbursed by the respondent shallnot form part of the gross value oftaxable service. The Revenue filed anappeal before the Tribunal where incontended that the expenses which areessential for execution of the taxableservice cannot be out of the ambit oftax. Such expenses which are notseparable but are inextricablyconnected with the service contributesto the value of service and cannot beignored. However, it was held that

service tax being destination basedconsumption tax, all the expensesincurred till the service reaches itsdestination becomes essentialconsideration of cost of service.Agreement of parties in respect ofmodality of payment of valuableconsideration towards serviceprovided does not matter for theRevenue. When there is no specificdeduction allowed under statutoryprovisions to diminish the value oftaxable service, the learnedCommissioner (Appeals) erred inexcluding the expenses reimbursed bythe service recipient to the serviceprovider from the purview of taxation.Hence, the appeal filed by theRevenue was allowed setting aside thefirst appellate order and restoring theorder-in-original. [Commissioner ofCentral Excise, Chandigarh vs. TeamS &S. 2011 (21) S.T.R 290 (Tri –Delhi)]

The petitioner is a companyengaged in development andconstruction of residential andcommercial properties in India andselling them to customers both inIndia and abroad. In terms of ForeignTrade Policy 2004-09 and Hand Bookof Procedures 2004-09, the petitionerapplied for the grant of Duty FreeCredit Entitlement Certificate(‘DFCEE’ or ‘duty free scrip’) underthe Served from India Scheme(‘SFIS’) against the exports made forwhich, The Director General ofForeign Trade granted two dutyscrips. Later show cause notices wereissued to the petitioner stating thatforeign exchange realised from therendering of service alone can betaken into account for SFIS benefitand hence foreign exchange earnedfrom the sale of immovable properties

12March2011

are not eligible for benefits underSFIS. However, it was held that thecounter-affidavit by the respondentsthat it is only such service that isrelatable to the sale of immovableproperty that would be eligible forissuance of duty free scrip under SFISis a plausible one to take. Hence therespondents are justified in notentertaining applications of thepetitioner for issuance of duty freescrips under SFIS on the ground thatthe petitioner is claiming the entiresale consideration and not just thecommission or brokerage, if any, onsuch sales for the purpose of duty freescrips. [DLF Limited vs. Union ofIndia. 2011 (21) S.T.R 212 (Delhi)]

The appellants had established e-Seva technology application systemfor providing online transactionaccess in respect of tax payments,issue of certificates, generating MISreports, etc., to the Government ofAndhra Pradesh. The Commissionerconfirmed the demand under theBusiness Auxiliary Services (‘BAS’)alongwith interest and penalty. Theappellant contended that theproceedings were not tenable in lawsince the show cause notice had notattempted to classify the servicesunder any of the six clauses underBAS. The Commissioner held thatthere was no impropriety if theassessment was done under the broadheading of BAS. However, it was heldthat the impugned order confirms thedemand under BAS withoutspecifying the cub-clause. Taxliability cannot be confirmed againsta person without putting it on noticeas to its liability. It is essential thatthe liability is indicated in the noticewith reference to the specificprovision. Since the impugned

proceedings did not allege at the showcause notice stage or at theadjudication stage the specificprovision under which the servicesrendered by the appellants areclassifiable, the impugned demand islegally not sustainable. Consequently,the demand of interest and penalty isalso not sustainable. [United TelecomLimited vs. Commissioner of CentralExcise, Hyderabad. 2011 (21) S.T.R234 (Tri – Bangalore)]

The appellants are engaged inproviding photographic services andhad excluded the cost of materialsused and sold to the customer whileproviding the said services. TheCommissioner (Appeals) held that thebill books produced by the appellantsshowed only cost of material and didnot indicate the break-up of value oftaxable services and cost of material.Consequently, the claim of theappellants was dismissed and thedemand was confirmed as in the showcause notice. The appellants filed stayapplication before the Tribunalwherein it was ordered that theappellants should report complianceof section 35F of the Central ExciseAct. However, due to non-compliancewith the said section, the Tribunaldismissed the stay application. Theappellants filed an application for therestoration of appeal on the groundthat the advocate engaged by themhad never intimated them about thedate of hearing and they had also notreceived any hearing notice from theTribunal. However, it was held thatthe appellants were offered severalopportunities to canvass its case forwaiver of pre-deposit which, were notavailed by them and hence the appealand the stay application weredismissed. Since the Tribunal does not

have power to review its orders, itbecomes functus officio after itpronounces and delivers a final orderin an appeal. Hence, the applicationfor restoration of the appeal and thestay application filed by the appellantwere dismissed. [Canon Colour Labvs. Commissioner of Central Exciseand Customs, Guntur. 2011 (21) S.T.R317 (Tri – Bangalore)]

The petitioner is engaged in thedevelopment and sale of residentialflats which are sold to the ultimatecustomers. Section 65(105)(zzzh)includes service in relation toconstruction of a complex and as perthe explanation added to the saidsection vide Finance Act, 2010,construction of complex by a builderor any person authorized by thebuilder, is deemed to be service by thebuilder to buyer. The petitionercontended that taxing of sale andpurchase was beyond the legislativecompetence of the Union legislature.If construction activity is notundertaken by a builder, then thebuilder cannot be considered to be aservice provider in relation to serviceof construction activities. However,it was held that the contention thatthere is no element of service ofconstruction involved in a builderselling a flat cannot be accepted.Whether or not service is involved hasto be seen not only from the point ofview of the builder but also from thepoint of view of the service recipient.The levy of tax is on service and noton the service provider andconstruction services are certainlyprovided even when a constructed flatis sold. Taxing of such transaction isnot outside the purview of the UnionLegislature as the same does not fallin any of the taxing entries of State

13 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

list. [G.S. Promoters vs. Union ofIndia. 2011 (21) S.T.R 100 (P & H)]

The respondents herein aremanufacturers of Distribution ControlSystem and Process ControlEquipments (‘DCSPCE’) and aredischarging excise duty. Therespondents are also providingtraining to the employees of theircustomers who purchase theDSCPCE. Revenue was of the viewthat the respondents are required topay service tax on training impartedunder the category “ConsultingEngineer” which, was paid by therespondents under protest. Therespondents contended that thetraining would be covered under“Commercial Training and CoachingCentre” brought into the tax net from1st July 2003 and filed a refund claimfor the tax paid prior to the said datewhich, the first Appellate Authorityhad accepted. On an appeal by theRevenue it was held that as per CBECCircular No. 79/9/2004-ST dated 13th

May 2004, erection, installation andcommissioning would not be coveredunder the category of consultingengineer, but would be covered underthe category of commercial coachingand training centre. Based on the saidCircular, the training imparted is nottaxable under the category ConsultingEngineer, but taxable underCommercial Training and CoachingCentre. Hence, the appeal filed by theRevenue being devoid of merits wasrejected. [Commissioner of CentralExcise, Bangalore-III vs. YokogawaBlue Star Limited. 2011 (21) S.T.R161 (Tri – Bangalore)]

The Revenue contended that theappellants had provided taxableservice in the category of Business

Auxiliary Services (‘BAS’) to itsgroup company and had not paidservice tax for such services andconducted investigation.Consequently, show cause notice wasissued to the appellants to bring themto the fold of service tax under BASfor the period July 2003 to Jan 2007which, was confirmed by the learnedCommissioner on the ground that theappellant had promoted andpublicized the real estate projects ofthe group company. The appellantcontended that the impugned order isbeyond the scope of the show causenotice and they merely displayed logoof the group companies and were notrendering any service. The entriespertaining to the services of brandpromotion and sale of space have beenintroduced subsequent to the saidperiod and hence not taxable.However, it was held that merely onthe basis of registration certificate, onecannot conclude about the liability ofservice tax. Merely because a firm hasobtained a registration certificate, itdoes not mean that the firm isproviding the services under which itis registered. Whether a firm isengaged in rendering a particular typeof service or not is purely a questionof law. Accordingly, the impugnedorder and the demand was quashed andset aside. [Jetlite (India) Limited vs.Commissioner of Central Excise, NewDelhi. 2011 (21) S.T.R 119 (Tri –Delhi)]

CUSTOMS

The issue to be resolved waswhether export duty could be imposedunder the Customs Act, 1961incorporating the definition of theexpression “export” under the SEZAct, 2005. As per Rule 23 of the SEZ

Rules, 2006, supplies from the DTAto a SEZ unit would be eligible forexport benefits as admissible underFTP. As per Rule 27, the exportbenefits on account of export of goodsfrom DTA to SEZ are available eitherto the DTA supplier or SEZ unit ordeveloper at their option. Suchprovision exempts goods brought inby the SEZ unit from all levies andduties and since the duty is leviableon the goods, it is not rational tocontend that the export from DTA toSEZ should be taxed while inwardmovement of goods from DTA to SEZwould be exempt. The object of theLegislature was to make availablegoods and services to the developeror unit within SEZ free of taxes andduties and hence the levy of exportduty is not contemplated under theAct. The movement of goods fromDTA to SEZ is treated as an exportunder the SEZ Act only by a legalfiction for the purpose of makingavailable benefits as in the case ofactual exports. Hence it is declaredthat no export duty would be payablefor supply of goods by the parties inDTA to the petitioners in the SEZ andall proceedings initiated in this regardare therefore quashed. [Shyamarajuand Company (India) PrivateLimited, Bangalore vs. Union of Indiaand Others. 2011 (70) Kar.L.J 130(HC)]

EXCISE

The respondent is the manufacturerof cigarettes and used duty paidaluminium foil in the roll form for thepurpose of packing cigarettes. In theprocess the aluminium roll is cut tosize, embossed with word ‘PULL’ andis wrapped in the cigarette. TheRevenue contended that the said

14March2011

activity amounts to manufacture onwhich excise duty is payable. TheAssistant Commissioner held that thealuminium foil cut to shape/embossedwhich is used for packing cigarettesdoes not amounts to manufacture.Being aggrieved by the order, theappellant preferred an appeal beforethe Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals) and CESTAT and both theappeals were dismissed. However, onappeal to the High Court it was heldthat aluminium foils cut to size andembossed in the course of manufactureof cigarettes is not manufacture. Meremention of the product in tariff headingdoes not necessarily implies that thesaid product was obtained by processof manufacture. Nothing on record wasavailable to suggest that the embossedaluminium foils used for packingcigarettes is a distinct marketable

commodity. Embossing on foil andcutting to shape and size during theprocess of packing of cigarettes doesnot amount to manufacture.[Commissioner of Central Excise,Mumbai vs. GTC Industries Limited,Mumbai. 2011-TIOL-82-HC-MUM-CX]

VALUE ADDED TAX

The issue in the present case relatedto the taxability of monthly leaserentals received under the KVAT Act.The appellant had purchased brandnew cars prior to 1/4/2005 within theState of Karnataka on payment ofKarnataka Sales Tax (‘KST’) which,were sold on an instalment basis. Tillthe completion of full tenure of thecontract the deferred saleconsideration in respect of the transferof right to use the KST suffered cars

received cannot be subjected to salestax. Since the taxable event under theKVAT Act is the sale or purchase ofgoods, there can be no liability to taxunder the KVAT Act in respect of theamounts received which do not formpart of the consideration for the sale orpurchase of the goods. If the sale itselfhas not taken place after 1/4/2005, theprovisions of the KVAT Act are notapplicable even if the deferred saleconsideration is received after 1/4/2005.Thus in respect of a sale which has takenplace prior to 1/4/2005 and an additionalor deferred consideration is receivedafter 1/4/2005, such receipts are notrequired to be declared in the tax returnsfiled under the KVAT Act and noliability to pay tax is cast on the dealer.[Lease Plan India Limited, Bangalorevs. State of Karnataka. 2011 (70)Kar.L.J (Tri.) (DB)]

Adv

t.

Extension of last date for complyingwith the requirements of CPE hours credit

from 31st December, 2010 to31st March, 2011 - (27-12-2010)

For information of the members

Sub : Extention of last date for complying with

the requirements of CPE hours credit from

31st December, 2010 to 31st March, 2011

This is for kind information of the members that

the Council of the Institute has decided to extend

the CPE Block period of 3 years ending on

31st December, 2010, by three months, i.e. to

31st March, 2011.

Check your CPE Credit at www.cpeicai.org

Announcement

15 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

Clause by Clause Discussion on Finance Bill 2011Organized by

Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI

Saturday, 12th March 2011

at Jnana Jyothi Convention Centre , Palace Road, Bangalorebetween 10.00am & 05.00pm

Time Subject Resource Persons

10.00am to 01.00pm Discussion on Indirect Taxes CA.K.S.Ravishankar

CA.V.Raghuraman

CA.Badrinath

02.00pm to 05.00pm Discussion on Direct Taxes CA.S.Ramasubramanian

CA.H.Padamchand Khincha

CA.K.K.Chaithanya

Delegate Fees: Rs.750/- for Members Rs.1000/- for Non-membersCheque / Cash in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI”

For further details please contact:Mrs. Roopashree

Tel: 080-30563500 / 3513 Email: blrregistrations@icai.org

6 hrsCPE

Adv

t.

Required Chartered Accountants / experiencedsemi-qualified candidates / Article clerks lookingfor challenging careersWe are a CA firm engaged in corporate accounting,statutory audits, internal audits, SoX audits, income-tax,international tax, transfer pricing, service tax, VAT andother indirect taxes, for our corporate and MNC clients.

We require smart, brilliant and hard-working CharteredAccountants / experienced semi-qualified candidates /Article clerks for immediate recruitment for our firm. Thecandidate should be able to offer a long-term commitment.

Our firm offers well-rounded exposure and an attractiveremuneration package commensurate with profile andexperience and fast-track career advancement opportunitiesfor committed candidates.

Interested Candidates may please sendtheir detailed resumes / bio-data to:

Rishi Madhur & Co. “HVM House”, Ist Floor, # 106,

Amarjoti Layout,Off Intermediate Ring Road, Domlur,

Bangalore -560 071.www.rishimadhur.com

Ph: 4114 5757 / 4114 5858 / 25352222Email: sheela@rishimadhur.com

Adv

t.

INVESTMENT BANKING COURSEA u s t a l G r o u p

WWW.AUSTALGROUP.NET/EDUCATION

LIVE CLASSROOM TRAINING

COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL MODELING AND

VALUATION ANALYSIS COURSE

Class Format

All 8 sessions (4 hours each) are tailored for personalizedinstruction using the case study approach. Each studentfollows the banker teaching the class and builds the financialmodels along with him.

Course Materials

INTRODUCTION AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS

COMPREHENSIVE VALUATION ANALYSIS

INTEGRATED CASH FLOW MODELING

COMPLETE LBO MODELING

MERGER (ACQUISITION) MODELING

INVESTMENT BANKING PROCESS AND BESTPRACTICES, INTERVIEW SKILLS AND RESUME REVISION

For More Information:

Please email us at info@austalgroup.net or sign upon our website at www.austalgroup.net/education.Please visit our website to view all our offerings.

For online payment,please visit :

www.icai-bangalore.org

16March2011

IMPORTANT DATES TO REMEMBER DURING THE MONTH OF MARCH 2011

5th March 2011 Payment of Excise Duty for February 2011

Payment of Service Tax for February 2011 by Corporates

6th March 2011 e-Payment of Excise duty for February 2011

e-Payment of Service Tax for for February 2011 by Corporates

Deposit of TDS/TCS Collected During February 2011

10th March 2011 Monthly Returns for Production and Removal of Goods and CENVAT Credit for February 2011

Monthly Return of excisable Goods Manufactured & Receipt of Inputs & Capital Goods byUnits in EOU,STP,HTP for February 2011

Monthly Returns of Information relating to Principal Inputs for February 2011 by Manufacturerof Specified Goods who Paid Duty of Rs.1 Crore or More During Financial Year 2009-10 ByPLA/CENVAT/Both

15th March 2011 Due Date for Third Installment (In the Case of Non Corporate Assessees) or Fourth Instalment(In the Case of Corporate Assessee) for Payment of Advance Income Tax for Financial year2010-11

Payment of EPF Contribution for February 2011

Return of Employees Qualifying to EPF During February 2011

Filing of VAT 120 under KVAT Laws for the month of February 2011

20th March 2011 Filing of VAT 100 under KVAT Laws for the month of February 2011

Deposit of ESI Contributions and Collections for February 2011

25th March 2011 Consolidated Statements of Dues and Remittances Under EPF and EDLI for February 2011

Monthly Returns of employees Joined the Organisation during February 2011

Monthly Return Return of Employees left the Organisation During February 2011

31st March 2011 Payment/e-Payment of Excise Duty for Mar 2011

Payment/e-Payment of excise duty for Quarter ending 31st March 2011 by SSIs/RegisteredDealers.

Payment/e-Payment of Service Tax for March 2011 by Corporates

Payment/e-Payment of Service Tax for the Quarter Ending 31st March 2011 by Non Corporates

Last Date for Revision of Income tax Return for the Financial year 2008-09

Requirement of Land / Building for Bangalore Branch

Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI is looking out for land /building for outright purchase /long lease for additional premises within the city of Bangalore. Minimum required land is15,000 sqft. upto 20,000 sqft. The land should be situated close to the Bangalore MetroStation and having easy accessibility and wide roads. Any builtup building facility of about20,000 sq ft. and having adequate parking facilities can also be considered. The branch is alsoopen to consider long lease of atleast 25 years. Please mail the details of land or buildingavailable to blrbuilding@icai.org

17 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012123456789012

CPE3

hours

For Online payment,please visit :

www.icai-bangalore.org

CPE6

hours

Seminar on “Bank Branch Audit”On 19th March 2011 between 09.30am & 06.00pm

at Hotel Le-Meridian, Bangalore

Timings Topic Speakers

08.45am to 09.30am Registration

09.30am to 10.30am Inauguration by Chief Guest : CA. G. Ramaswamy, President, ICAIGuest of Honour : CA. Jaydeep Narendra Shah, Vice President, ICAI

10.30am to 10.45am Tea Break

10.45am to 12noon Audit of advances with special CA. R Sathyanarayana Murthy,reference to IRAC norms Bangalore

12noon to 01.15pm Overview of Statutory Branch Audit CA. M N Venkatesan,other than Advances Chennai

01.15pm to 02.15pm Lunch Break

02.15pm to 03.30pm Audit Documentation CA. N Nityananda,– Peer review perspective Past Central Council Member of ICAI,

Bangalore

03.30pm to 03.45pm Tea Break

03.45pm to 06.00pm Stepping through key information CA.R Vittal Raj,system controls in Bank Branch Audit Chennai

Delegate Fees: Rs.1500/- for Members, Rs.2000/- for Non-membersCheque / Cash in favour of “Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI”

For further details please contact:Mrs. Roopashree, Tel: 080-30563500 / 3513, Email: blrregistrations@icai.org

Interactive Session with CPC (Income Tax) OfficialsUnder the aegis of

Direct Taxes Committee of ICAI

Chief Guest : Mr.Sanjai Verma, CIT, CPC

Guest of Honor : CA.Sanjay K AgarwalChairman, Direct Taxes Committee of ICAI

Date : 16/03/2011 Venue : Branch PremisesTime : 5.30 pm - 8.30 pm

CA.Venkatesh Babu T.R. CA. K. Raghu CA. Ravindranath S. N.Chairman Programme Co-ordinator Secretary

Central Processing Centre has been in the forefront of innovations from the Income Tax Department to improveCiitizen centric Service Delivery. Some of the innovations include, E-filing of Income Tax returns, E-filing ofrectification requests, a strong call centre to address assessee queries besides internal reengineering to speed upprocessing, improve accuracy of processing and reduce assessee grievances.

18March2011

Congratulations

• Days of Class Room Each consecutive Saturday/Sunday totalfour weeks

• Duration of the course 100 Hours consisting of: 60 Hours ofE-Learning 40 Hours of Class Room Teaching

• CPE Hours The CPE credit of 90 Hours (30 Structured +60 Unstructured) will be given to the participants.

• Venue of the Course: Would intimated in due course

• Fee Structure

Participation fee (members) - Rs. 30,000/-

Non Members – Rs. 50, 000/-

Certificate Course on IFRS at Bangalore Centre – Seventh Batch We are pleased to announce that 7th Batch at Bangalore Centre of Certificate Course on IFRS is scheduled to commence from 26th March

2011. The other details are mentioned below:

The Demand draft may be drawn in favour of“The Secretary, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India”,payable at New Delhi.

Course Coordinator for Bangalore Centre:CA. K. RaghuCentral Council Member, ICAI

For further details please contact –

Mr. Jagadish Kumar NS – 93427 32548 /

Mr. Raghavendra SV- 9379918344

dcobangalore@icai.org, 080 – 3056 3543

CA. H. Shivakumarhas been nominated as

Chairman ofSICASA, Bangalorefor the year 2011-12

Jeswin Joy JohnRoll No: 18553

from Bangalore for having

secured First Rank on

all India level in

PCC NOV. 2010

RANK HOLDERS FROM BANGALORE -NOV 2010 EXAMPCC NOV 2010 EXAM

SL.NO Reg.no Roll.no NAME Rank1 SRO0233516 18553 JESWIN JOY JOHN 12 SRO0227897 18718 NIKHILA BALLAL.N 123 SRO0213123 19387 SUNIL KUMAR.R 254 SRO0256962 19423 NATESH.K.N 365 SRO0273674 19345 NARASIMHULU.K 426 SRO0245027 18450 VIGNESH PAI.T 49

IPCC NOV 2010 EXAMSL.NO Reg.no Roll.no NAME Rank

1 SRO0245915 124823 MANASA.V.NAYAK 132 SRO0221349 125273 NIDHI.K.KUMAR 283 SRO0285966 124813 RAVISHANKER.V 42

FINAL(OLD) NOV 2010 EXAMSL.NO Reg.no Roll.no NAME Rank

1 SRO0212816 10442 SUJAY.K.N 12 SRO0209808 9472 NAGARAJA.T.S 203 SRO0193324 10348 SOUMYA SURENDRAN 204 ERO0058001 10481 NISHA TULSYAN 32

FINAL(NEW) NOV 2010 EXAMSL.NO Reg.no Roll.no NAME Rank

1 SRO0208189 50289 PARVATHI.R 252 SRO0222624 50132 VISHVAS.B.S 323 SRO0193668 50240 CHINMAYA HEGDE 39

19 March2011

Bangalore Branch of SIRCof the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

20March2011