sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
« From the Courts »
 Commissioner, Customs And Service Tax (Cgst) vs M/s Shri Nakoda Ispat Ltd. Through Its Authorized Person
 Commissioner Of Cgst And Central Excise vs Metro Security Services Thr. Its Director
 Commissioner Of Cgst And Central Excise vs Metro Security Services Thr. Its Director
 India’s new proposal for transfer pricing secondary adjustments is welcome relief
 M/s. Ambience Constructions India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs And Central Excise, Hyderabad
 DCIT vs. Inventaa Industries Private Limited (ITAT Hyderabad Special Bench)
 20 LPA-Opening Senior Manager Finance
 Aloka Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka & Ors.
 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 6 Jaipur vs Garment Crafts
 M/s. Ambience Constructions India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs And
 Central Bureau Of Investigation vs S.K. Ranu

Supreme court on 43 B holding the amendment retrospective
November, 17th 2007
CIT vs. Vinay Cement Ltd (Supreme Court)

Contribution made towards provident fund etc; after the close of the accounting period but before the due date for filing of the return of income are allowable as a deduction u/s 43B(b) of the Act even for assessment years prior to the deletion of the second proviso by the Finance Act 2003 wef 1.4.2004.

Note: The judgement of the High Court in CIT vs. George Williamson 284 ITR 619 (Gau) was approved. The judgement of the Bombay High Court in CIT vs. M/s Godavari Sahakari (Bombay High Court) and that of the Madras High Court in CIT vs. Synergy Financial Exchange 288
ITR 366 stand impliedly overruled while that of the Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. M/s Sabari Enterprises (Karnataka High Court) stands impliedly approved.
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
E-catalogue online catalogue E-brochure online brochure online product catalogue online product catalogue e-catalogue Indi

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions