Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Otoklin Global Business, A Partnership Firm, Mumbai and Mr. Dhaval Dilip Jhaveri Versus The State of Maharashtra, Bombay and Others

Validity of mortgage - Held that:- In the present case, the mortgage was created in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the second Respondent in 1992. That mortgage was declared as to be valid and binding by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai on 5th September 2005 in its order passed in the Original Application No.1025 of 2001. There is no written document of tenancy. There is absolutely no registered instrument on record either. In these circumstances, a very vague submission as made by Mr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rty and nephew of other two co-owners. The Petitioners have sought to establish the tenancy by filing a collusive Suit. That Suit was filed so as to defeat the measures in relation to the mortgaged property in favour of the Bank. Therefore, this Court should not accept the claim of the Petitioners. - CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1092 OF 2016 - Dated:- 28-7-2016 - S.C. DHARMADHIKARI AND DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ. For The Petitioners : Mr. Simil Purohit, a/w. Mr. Manoj Agre and Mr. Girish Kedi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of, calling for the records and proceedings of Case No.67/SA/2012 from the file of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay and after examining the legality, validity and correctness of the three orders passed therein dated 6th November 2015, 19th December 2015 and 29th December 2015, the same be quashed and set aside. This relief is sought in the following facts and circumstances. 3. The first Petitioner before us is claiming to be a Partnership Firm, registered under the Indian Partne .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

orporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and in the business as above, so also of pipe coating from a factory at MIDC, Taloja, District Thane and in the State of Gujarat. 5. The second Petitioner is an individual and a Partner of the first Petitioner. The claim of the Petitioners further is that from the premises on the Ground Floor in Shah Industrial Estate, about 627 sq.ft. were being used as a registered office by this third Respondent, but the Petitioners and the thir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

spondent Nos.4 and 5. The said Shirish Jhaveri expired in 1994. Respondent No.6(i) to (iii) are his legal heirs and representatives. The second Respondent is an Asset Reconstruction Company and has taken over the debt of Bank of Baroda. The Petitioners state that Respondent Nos.4 and 5 along with deceased Shirish Jhaveri were the Directors of Respondent No.3. 8. The Petitioners have set out as to how after formation of Petitioner No.1-Firm in 1997, the registration under the Indian Partnership A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

were diligent and regular in payment of the monthly rent. There was no default. The Petitioners cannot, therefore, be evicted, except in accordance with the law, namely, the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The Petitioners were constrained to file a Suit, being R.A.D. Suit No.692/2011 of 2014 in the Court of Small Causes at Mumbai for a declaration that they are the tenants in respect of the tenancy premises and in which Suit, a Decree was passed on 31st July 2014, declaring the Petitioners .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nding amount. The claim of the Bank referred to certain security interest created and styled as a mortgage of immovable property. The mortgage by deposit of Title Deeds in relation to certain immovable properties at Mumbai included the tenancy premises. It is stated that in the Original Application, the third Respondent pointed out that majority of the properties were in possession of the tenants and they should not be evicted only on the strength of a Recovery Certificate. This legal position w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Official Liquidator dated 31st May 2002, which would confirm that the possession of 627 sq.ft. area on the ground floor of the building came to be handed over and that is how the record of the Official Liquidator would indicate and confirm the events, which occurred during obtaining the said possession. 10. Then it is stated that the Bank of Baroda assigned its debt by a Deed of Assignment dated 21st January 2008 in favour of the second Respondent to this Petition. Thus, the Recovery Certif .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al Receiver, acting in execution of the Recovery Certificate, did not take possession of the balance portion. Then it is stated that the proceedings, namely, Executing Proceedings, were allowed to be amended to correct the area in possession of the Recovery Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai. After the corrections / amendments were carried out, a public notice for sale of the tenancy premises was put up. That described the Petitioner No.1 only as an occupant and not a lawful tenant. Furt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unal dated 16th March 2011. The Petitioners also referred to the application filed by the second Respondent to this Writ Petition before the Recovery Officer claiming a relief of handing over possession of the entire ground floor of Plot No.1, Shah Industrial Estate, to the Tribunal Receiver. It is stated that after hearing the necessary parties, the Recovery Officer was pleased to reject the application on 10th May 2012. However, the second Respondent still prevailed upon the authorized officer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o a rejoinder and eventually it is stated that against the pasting and issuance of notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, the Petitioners preferred Securitisation Application No.322 of 2011. The Petitioners' reference to the contents of this Securitisation Application and its prayers is in para 19 of the Petition. 11. The Petitioners then refer to the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act made by the Respondent-Company. The Petitioners were apprehensive of loosing their t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d its verdict in the case of Harshad Govardhan Sondagar Vs. International Assets Reconstruction Co. Ltd. & Ors. In Criminal Appeal No.736 of 2014, along with connected matters. The Petitioners submit that this Judgment recognized and protected the tenants and it was held that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate / District Magistrate cannot, in the garb of resorting to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, interfere with the physical possession of the parties like the present Petitioners. Thus, the P .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not maintainable and dismissed, yet, the interim protection therein was extended by four weeks, namely, till 8th July, 2014. The Petitioners, therefore, were of the view that it had correctly moved this Securitisation Application by invoking Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The second Respondent questioned its maintainability and at its instance, this order dated 9th June 2014 was passed. Now, the Petitioners have not been able to substantiate the claim of tenancy either in this Securitisation Ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Application before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and the said Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was directed to dispose of the same within four months. This order of this Court was challenged by the aggrieved Respondents to the Writ Petition in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. However, there was no stay to the said order from the Supreme Court. The result would be that a senior citizen is dispossessed from the premises, though the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Sondagar's c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6th November 2015, 19th December 2015 and 29th December 2015. 13. It is these orders which are challenged in the present Petition by the Petitioners. Mr. Purohit, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, submits that the impugned orders are contrary to law. The said orders are passed at the instance of the Assignee of the Debt of the Bank. If the Bank/Original Decree-holder has accepted the Petitioners' tenancy, then, this Assignee was bound by that stand of the Bank of Baroda .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder passed on 5th September 2005. This was the order allowing the Original Application No.1025 of 2001 and pursuant to the said order, the Bank of Baroda and Respondent No.2 had initiated Execution Application No.322 of 2005, in which an application for forcible dispossession of the Petitioners from the tenancy premises was made, but that application was rejected on 10th May 2012 (Annexure- K ). It is in such circumstances that the Assignee of the Debt of the Bank could not have taken recourse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on Co. Ltd. & Ors. In Criminal Appeal No.736 of 2014, along with connected matters and Vishal N. Kalsaria Vs. Bank of India & Ors., AIR 2016 SC 530. 15. On the other hand, Mr. N.G. Thakkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2 (contesting Respondent) submits that the entire Petition is bogus, frivolous and vexatious. He would submit that the Petitioners have not set out any particulars of the tenancy. Mr. Thakkar would submit that the Writ Petition involves dispu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s to be valid and binding by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai on 5th September 2005 in its order passed in the Original Application No.1025 of 2001. There is no written document of tenancy. There is absolutely no registered instrument on record either. In these circumstances, a very vague submission as made by Mr. Purohit that there was a tenancy much prior to 1998, cannot be accepted. The relevant documents evidencing creation of such tenancy, which is, admittedly, after the mortgage in fa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the mortgaged property in favour of the Bank. Therefore, this Court should not accept the claim of the Petitioners. The tenancy is bogus and fake. Mr. Thakkar relies upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Harshad Govardhan Sondagar Vs. International Assets Reconstruction Company Limited & Ors., (2014) 6 SCC 1. The Petitioner No.2 is the son of the owner of the premises, who created the mortgage. Thus, none of the Petitioners are strangers to the rights of the Bank. Further, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tgage is evidenced by the Memorandum of Entry dated 3rd August 1992, as extended by the Memorandum of Entry dated 23rd December 1994. Annexure A of the affidavit-in-reply is relied upon by Mr. Thakkar in that regard. Mr. Thakkar then relied upon the Recovery Certificate issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in favour of the Bank of Baroda in Original Application No.1025 of 2001, the recovery proceedings / Petition No.376 of 2005 and a Deed of Assignment of the Debt dated 28th January 2008 in favo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

und floor area admeasuring approximately 4367 sq.ft. Only an area of 180 sq.ft. was in possession of Tribunal Receiver and was given to the authorized officer of the second Respondent by the Receiver of the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai, who himself was put in possession of the smaller property by the Official Liquidator. The remaining area on the ground floor admeasuring 4187 sq.ft. continues to be in illegal possession of Petitioner No.1. It is that property / part over which the claim of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.2418 of 2014 is pending. Still the second Respondent participated in the proceedings before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai, without prejudice. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has given the Petitioners extensive opportunities. Mr. Thakkar, therefore, supports the impugned orders and submits that the Writ Petition be dismissed. 17. A list of dates and events was handed over by Mr. Thakkar. He also handed over a copy of the plaint, in which the alleged collusive Decree was pas .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ve to produce evidence of payment of rent. If the rent was paid and also the property taxes, then, the Petitioners could have definitely produced the requisite receipts. If the rent and permitted increases were payable, then, the quantum ought to have been mentioned. The quantum may have remained static, but proof of payment of that quantum is not forthcoming. The relationship between the parties being already demonstrated, Mr. Thakkar submits that this is a got-up case and this Court should not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

31st May 2002, it is not stated that the Petitioners or Petitioner No.1-Firm was in possession of the premises. It is in these circumstances and relying upon Sections 48 and 65A of the Transfer of Properties Act, 1882, that Mr. Thakkar submits that the Petition be dismissed. 18. On this Petition, we had passed an initial protective order on 18th April 2016. In that order, we had recorded the readiness and willingness of Mr. Purohit to produce the relevant documents, which would evidence and pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

had recorded the statement of Mr. Purohit that he would produce relevant and material documents to prove the existence of tenancy. However, Exhibits 1 and 3 to this additional affidavit cannot be said to be any documents proving the same. On the other hand, the Petitioners rely upon Exhibit-2 to the additional affidavit, which are nothing but the copies of covering letters addressed to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay. The photocopies of some cheques have been produced to show that th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

remises are allegedly located, of ₹ 1,00,000/-. That is to be appropriated to the rent payable to the landlords for granting tenancy. It was an obligation on the landlords, as per the instructions of Respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6, which the Petitioners have discharged. However, Exhibit No.3 is a letter dated 1st February 2010 addressed by the authorized signatory of Petitioner No.1. It is referring to some verbal understanding on the subject of payment for digging local pit under the Common El .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ve also perused the relevant annexures to the Petition and the affidavit / additional affidavit. We have also perused the relevant statutory provisions and the decisions brought to our notice. 21. We had called upon Mr. Purohit to produce a copy of the plaint in the Suit instituted by the present Petitioner No.1 in the Court of Small Causes at Mumbai. 22. Mr. Purohit has fairly produced a copy of the plaint in R.A.D. Suit No.692 of 2011. That Suit was filed against Dilip Kundalal Jhaveri and fou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Certificate of Importer-Exporter Code from Ministry of Commerce and some correspondence with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay are relied upon, but these, to our mind, would demonstrate, at best, the physical possession of Petitioner No.1 in respect of the said premises. The cause of action for filing the Suit is stated to be that one Otoklin Plants & Equipments Limited obtained Banking facilities from Bank of Baroda. Defendant Nos.1 and 2 to the Suit as well as the father of Defe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on Company before us. The Petitioners / Plaintiffs therein have not joined either the Bank or the International Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited as a party-Defendant. They have also not impleaded the Official Liquidator. Be that as it may, the Suit claims a declaration that the Plaintiffs are duly protected as tenants under the provisions of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. 23. It is in these circumstances, that we are of the view that Mr. Thakkar is right in contending that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Ld. Small Causes Court, Mumbai on 31.7.2014 thereby declaring the Petitioners as lawful Tenants in respect of the said Tenancy premises and as such the status of the Petitioners being a Tenant is confirmed by the Competent Court of jurisdiction." 24. The Consent Terms, copy of which is at Exhibit "G" to the Petition, read thus: "1. The Defendants are landlords and owners of the premises on the ground floor of building standing on Plot No.1, Shah Industrial Area, Veera Des .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t;) for a monthly tenancy rent of ₹ 1000/-. 2. The Plaintiffs and Defendants agree that the Plaintiffs shall pay all proportionate outgoings of the tenancy premises i.e. BMC Tax, Water Tax, property tax and electricity charges consumed by them. 3. The Defendants further admit that the Plaintiffs are their tenants prior to 1998 in respect of area admeasuring 3740 sq. feet out of the total area of 4367 sq. feet of the premises on the ground floor of building standing on Plot No.1, Shah Indus .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Plaintiffs agreed to pay all outgoings in respect of the said tenancy premises i.e. BMC Tax, Water Tax, property tax and electricity charges consumed by them. 5. The parties hereto agree and undertake to this Hon'ble Court to execute such further and other documents, assurances and writings as may be required by the Plaintiffs and/or their nominees and/or assigns for the purpose of implementing and/or carrying out the intents of these Consent Terms. 6. The suit is decreed in terms of pray .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ecreeing the Suit in terms of the Consent Decree reads as under:- "1. The authorized signatory of the plaintiff, defendant No.1 for self and on behalf of the defendant Nos.2 to 5 and their Advocates are present before me. 2. The Consent Terms is signed by the plaintiff and defendants. The respective Ld. Advocates of the plaintiff and defendant have identified their signatures on Consent Terms. The contents of Consent Terms are read over and explained to the parties before me. They have admi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

plaintiff as per rules. Decree be drawn up accordingly." 26. It is pertinent to note that the terms have been prepared, signed and filed by the Petitioner No.2 and his father Dilip Kundanlal Jhaveri. The said Dilip obtained a Special Power of Attorney in favour from the other Defendants to the Suit on 30/07/2015 and filed the terms promptly and they were accepted on 31st July, 2015. Besides all this, a perusal of the terms resulting in the Decree would reveal that it is a product of collusi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cably agrees and undertakes to regularly pay" in these clauses would expose the parties' version before this Court. It is a clear case of a patently false claim of tenancy projected by misleading this Court. To protect parties placing such version before the Highest Court in the State would make complete mockery of the rule of law. This is a clear abuse of the process of this Court. None including the Hon'ble Supreme Court expects upholding of false, bogus and misleading claims of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bunal-II, Mumbai. Mr. Thakkar, therefore, is right in contending that, until all the steps were taken by Respondent No.2 to this Writ Petition, by invoking the provisions of SARFAESI Act, the claim of tenancy was not asserted. In fact, the Securitization Application (S.A. No.322 of 2011) was filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai. In all this time and after the institution of this Securitisation Application, symbolic possession of the premises was obtained on 22nd August 2011. The Pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

any material justifying the order of the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai. He has also not been able to place before this Court any order, which would conclusively prove and establish the Petitioners' claim of monthly tenancy, being genuinely protected by the Court of competent jurisdiction. In such circumstances, we do not think that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was in error in allowing the application made by the second Respondent. He has rightly directed the concerned Police Station and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me-what identical controversy recently in the case of Atul Daulatrai Desai Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., in Writ Petition No.7745 of 2016, decided on 7th July 2016. During the course of considering the claim of tenancy, that too monthly, based on prolonged possession, we had held that in Vishal Kalsaria (supra), the Supreme Court of India, did not doubt the tenancy, nor the claim in that behalf. If such doubts are raised and the claims can be termed as 'bogus and dubious', then, d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aim of tenancy was laid and that the obstruction to that possession needs to be prevented. The Court of Small Causes, Mumbai passed a detailed order at an interlocutory stage and granted interim injunction in above terms. Thus, these are cases where the parties in physical possession, fearing eviction and dispossession and promptly approach the Court of competent jurisdiction, file a suit and make an interim application therein seeking protection against their dispossession. In such cases, the C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and with greatest respect by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. A judgment cannot be read like statutes. Eventually if the Rent Control Legislation and the benefit thereof can be availed off by tenants and occupants, the initial burden is on them to establish and prove the existence of a tenancy and that will be in jeopardy by the act of either the principal borrower or the bank. In the present case, we do not think any such proof is forthcoming, more so, when the challenge to the or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Highlight: Restriction on number of layers for certain classes of holding companies - More than two layers of subsidiaries not allowed subject to certain exceptions.

Forum: GST on RCM on rent in a unregistered state

Forum: COMPOSITION SCHEME

Forum: Input Tax Credit - Reg

Forum: GST Invoice

Article: Websites of Government Departments need lot of improvement. We are noticing detoriations in them for example, case of website of ITAT.

Highlight: Levy of additions tax u/s 115O on distribution of dividend - shares of its profits declared as distributable among the shareholders is not impressed with the character of the profit from which it reaches the hands of the shareholder - not to be bifurcated as agriculture and non-agriculture dividend - SC

Highlight: Rate of GST on old and scrap buses - 28% or 18% - at such initial tender process initiated by the Respondents-KSRTC, the present petitions filed by the petitioners are premature and misconceived and do not require any interference by this Court at this stage. - HC

Forum: Rent a cab operator

Highlight: In view of amendment made u/s 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Finance Act of 2017, the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as the case may be, shall not be disclosed to any person or any authority or the Appellate Tribunal, SC dismissed the appeal of the assessee

Highlight: Validity of Assessment Order - period of limitation u/s 153 (2A) is applicable even if the entire order was not set aside but matter was remanded back for for limited aspects with directions - HC

News: Note ban was a shake-up, achieved its main objectives

Notification: Amendments in the notification No.5/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated the 28th June, 2017.

Highlight: Levying interest u/s 234C - interest is to be charged on the returned income and not on assessed income.

Highlight: Accrual of income - sale of right to develop and sell incentive FSI under LOI - till the conditions of LOI are fulfilled transfer is not complete and income does not accrue to the assessee

Highlight: TPA - determination of ALP - TP adjustment by applying Bright Line Test (BLT) is not sustainable on protective basis having no statutory mandate.

Highlight: Safeguard Duty - Advance License Scheme - as there is no exemption from safeguard duty leviable under Section 8C, which is imposed on the goods imported from China, the importer has to pay safeguard duty

Highlight: Manufacture - process of cutting of waste plastic container - Such plastic containers before and after cutting are nothing but waste / scrap - Not a manufacturing activity as no new product emerges.

News: NITI Aayog and Govt. of Assam organizes workshop on health sector reforms in Guwahati; launches SATH- Sustainable Action for Transforming Human Capital

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 5/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding restriction of refund on corduroy fabrics

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 2/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst exemptions

Forum: GSTR 3B Rectification

Notification: seeks to exempt Skimmed milk powder, or concentrated milk

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 2/2017- integrated tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to GST council decisions regarding GST exemptions.

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 1/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst rates

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 1/2017- integrated tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst rates.

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

Highlight: Classification printed computer stationary/manifold Business Forms - to be classified under Chapter Heading 4820.00 or under Chapter Heading 4901.90 - items like A4 sheets, advertisement and job card to be classified under Chapter 49

Article: RCM Applicability to persons not liable to get registered us 23(1)

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version