Latest Expert Exchange Queries
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) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: TDS :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: empanelment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: form 3cd :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: due date for vat payment :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: VAT Audit :: VAT RATES :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4%
 
 
From the Courts »
  Madras Bar Association vs. UOI ( Supreme Court Constitution Bench)
 Donaldson India Filters Systems Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (Delhi High Court)
 Shri Premal N. Parikh, 202, Paras Apartments, 4,Dattatray Road, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400 054 Vs. The ITO -19(2)(2), Piramal Chambers, Mumbai-400 012
 Income Tax Officer, Ward-25(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Vs. Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Prop. M/s Esquire Electronic, A-138, Saraswati Vihar, Delhi 110 034.
 Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad. Vs. Shri Avneesh Kumar Agarwal, R-5/115, Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad.
 Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-12, New Delhi. J-83, Vs Shri Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, J-83, Extension, Guru Ramdas Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi.
 Public Health Guard-India Trust,Bk No. A-54, R. No. 323,Ground Floor, Nr. Bank of Baroda, Ulhasnagar-421 001 Vs. The CIT-III, Room No. 7,A-Wing, 6th Floor, Ashar, I.T. Park Road ,Wagle Industrial Estate, Thane-400 604
 Shri Shantilal C. Rathod 73, Crystal A New Link Road Dahanukar Wadi, Kandivali (W) Mumbai 400067 Bandra (E), Vs. A C I T 25(3) C-11 Road No. 308, 3rd Floor Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai 400051
 M/s. Basera Construction Plot No. 112, Ground Floor 6th Road, TPS-III, Khar Road (W) Mumbai 400052 VS DCIT, Central Circle-9 CGO Bldg. Annexe M.K. Road, Mumbai 400020
 Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Ghaziabad. Vs Shri Manoj Kumar Agarwal, KM-140, Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad.
 Mohan Sambhaji Jagthap, 2995, Sector 23, Gurgaon. Vs ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi.

CA firm is not a shop under Bombay Shops and Establishments Act
August, 15th 2006
A 30-year-old battle later chartered accountants (CAs) in Maharashtra have regained their position as "learned professionals'' on the same footing as the three traditional professions-church, medicine and law. Significantly, CA firms would no longer have to abide by the labour laws that are part of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act.

In a landmark order, the Bombay high court has held that the office of a chartered accountant was not a "business and commercial'' establishment. A division bench of Justice S B Mhase and Justice S R Sathe struck down as "unconstitutional'' sections of the Bombay Shops and Establishment Act that included CAs within the definition of commercial establishments.

The court's orders came on a petition filed by one of the city's top CA firms, Ms A F Ferguson and Company, and six of its partners. Senior advocate Jamshed Cama had challenged the constitutional validity of the amendment in the Act in 1977, which brought CA firms within its purview.

Cama contended that the CA firm was not involved in commercial activities but a profession that involved intellectual skill and manual skill controlled by intellectual skill. It did not deal with production or sale of commodities.

Associate Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, representing the state, contended that the CA firms had many employees and was essentially a commercial venture.

The major impact of the judgment would be that CA firms would no longer have to abide by the labour laws that are part of the Act. The Bombay Shops and Establishments Act provides for specific work hours and holidays for employees as well as health and safety measures. The Act laid down that employees working in such establishments would not work for more than eight hours in a day with a recess of one hour and or more than 48 hours in a week. 

The judges observed that CA firms were being wrongly equated with shops. "The working hours of the office of the chartered accountant cannot be regarded like that of a shop or establishment,'' said the judges. "It will be difficult to maintain relations and entertain clients by the CAs.''

The judges referred to a 1964 judgment that addressed similar questions and held that the three traditional professions had to change with time and new developments in trade, commerce and industry require a new class of professionals-chartered accountants.
 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2015 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Outsourcing Test Solutions Software Testing Software Bug Testing Software Issues Tracking Software Issue Fix Software Code Optimization Database Design Optimization

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