Accounting x Taxation x sebi ET AL
TG
Jan 12
Jan 12
CGT
Accountant >
TG
http://taxguru.in/income-tax/icai-mooted-ind-sharing-thoughts.html
>>>
Full Text of Exposure Draft of Indian Accounting Standard (Ind AS) 113 Fair Value Measurement -Download
BL
Ind AS
ca Journal issue 2014 sept.
ICAI e-Journal (September 2014 - PDF Download) - The ...
The application of the acquisition method requires that the identifiable net assets of the acquired company would be recorded in the acquirer’s books at fair values as on the acquisition date. Consideration paid for the business combination is also measured at fair value and any excess consideration paid over the fair value of the identifiable net assets is recorded as goodwill. Where the fair value of the identifiable net assets is greater than the fair value of the consideration, the gain is recorded as capital reserve.
Jottings-
(FAIR VALUE ? - CAN IT BE MORE THAN THE AGREED CONSIDERATION, ESPECIALLY IF..IN CASH NOT IN KIND, WHOLLY OR PARTLY, a nebulous, common thread of controversy, taken its poisonous root, spread its tentacles
what started off, kick-started as an experiment, testing fresh waters- carried too far to offend not legal sense alone but common sense itself/as well in one go/sweep
TANGIBLE X INTANGIBLE - WHY SHOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE
WHY GLOBAL - WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PRECINCTS OF THE CONTRACT ACT- does it anywhere talk of
actual consideration - over or understated , may be yes, but not if stated, accrued and receivable/ received, is actual nothing but actual
vires the constitution, should not the contract act be the deciding touch stone
Should not, in the interests of the humanity/society, the direction be changed sooner than later, and switched over to the age-old idea of time-honored/- tested , by any thinking a far afar better, if not the best, accounting principle- "historical cost or market value, which ever is less". In one's clear impartial perspective, that may have the result of slowing down in a great measure, if not put a 'hand break', to the largely prevalent, alarmingly accelerated "commercialization" of every action or inaction, to which the social evil of 'corruption" engulfing the whole of humanity is , in the ultimate analysis, inexcusably traceable.
< Ind AS requires all business combinations (..) ... to be accounted as per the acquisition method of accounting, irrespective of the legal form ....?
art. (amit somani)
asomani.personal@gmail.com
On IFRS >
Rumblings <<<<<
Tax
- Section 54 places thrust on investment & not on completion
- Section 54F exemption cannot be denied for mere delay in completion of construction
Accountant >
TG
http://taxguru.in/income-tax/icai-mooted-ind-sharing-thoughts.html
>>>
Full Text of Exposure Draft of Indian Accounting Standard (Ind AS) 113 Fair Value Measurement -Download
Full
Text of Exposure Draft of Indian Accounting Standard (Ind AS) 113 Fair
Value Measurement -Download - See more at:
http://taxguru.in/chartered-accountant/exposure-draft-indian-accounting-standard-ind-113-fair-measurement.html#sthash.JaQOdYE2.dpuf
BL
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has rightly pointed to the
need to clear the “jungle of archaic laws... »
Ind AS
ca Journal issue 2014 sept.
ICAI e-Journal (September 2014 - PDF Download) - The ...
The application of the acquisition method requires that the identifiable net assets of the acquired company would be recorded in the acquirer’s books at fair values as on the acquisition date. Consideration paid for the business combination is also measured at fair value and any excess consideration paid over the fair value of the identifiable net assets is recorded as goodwill. Where the fair value of the identifiable net assets is greater than the fair value of the consideration, the gain is recorded as capital reserve.Jottings-
(FAIR VALUE ? - CAN IT BE MORE THAN THE AGREED CONSIDERATION, ESPECIALLY IF..IN CASH NOT IN KIND, WHOLLY OR PARTLY, a nebulous, common thread of controversy, taken its poisonous root, spread its tentacles
what started off, kick-started as an experiment, testing fresh waters- carried too far to offend not legal sense alone but common sense itself/as well in one go/sweep
TANGIBLE X INTANGIBLE - WHY SHOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE
WHY GLOBAL - WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PRECINCTS OF THE CONTRACT ACT- does it anywhere talk of
actual consideration - over or understated , may be yes, but not if stated, accrued and receivable/ received, is actual nothing but actual
vires the constitution, should not the contract act be the deciding touch stone
Indian contract act- defn- action to do, inaction not to do
, consideration
Form v substance < Vodafone (tax case, subject matter of
transfer share x controlling interest) , hill properties (property law, debt
recovery),
It is the concept of
contract, right of any two parties to agree, decide on the terms and conditions
Sale x purchase- one of deemed service, so as to levy tax on
service (deemed)
Agreed price x transfer pricing
Sebi – a mere regulatory authority- power to rewrite
Accounting – AS 7
In the process – even the basic charter has come to be
tampered with
Updating construction- what that means- does that mean rewriting
the concept itself- if so to what extent and with what result, consequence
NAP, VODAFONE - FORM V SUBSTANCE
historical cost v fair market value (reaI ISATION VALUE ?)
IS NOT THE WHOLE EXERCISE, EXPERIMENTS, WITH CONTINUING RESEARCH BY EXPERTS (mostly in the field of ACCOUNTING ) A FARCE / WITH NO ULTIMATE PURPOSE TO BE SERVED / SUB-SERVED, IN REAL TERMS, TO ANYONE OR MORE CONCERNED- even assuming there be any?
While on the one hand an increasingly loud noise is being made / deafeningly heard from many well informed circles, clamoring for 'simplification' of all and sundry- not barring in the most vital field of 'legislation', why the largely perceived perpetration and perpetuation of complexity, verging , nay is tantamount to complicity, should be regarded as for the common good of all being consequently impacted. IN short, life is being made more and more complicated and convoluted, instead of being rendered simpler and simpler as honestly desired.
IS NOT THE WHOLE EXERCISE, EXPERIMENTS, WITH CONTINUING RESEARCH BY EXPERTS (mostly in the field of ACCOUNTING ) A FARCE / WITH NO ULTIMATE PURPOSE TO BE SERVED / SUB-SERVED, IN REAL TERMS, TO ANYONE OR MORE CONCERNED- even assuming there be any?
While on the one hand an increasingly loud noise is being made / deafeningly heard from many well informed circles, clamoring for 'simplification' of all and sundry- not barring in the most vital field of 'legislation', why the largely perceived perpetration and perpetuation of complexity, verging , nay is tantamount to complicity, should be regarded as for the common good of all being consequently impacted. IN short, life is being made more and more complicated and convoluted, instead of being rendered simpler and simpler as honestly desired.
< Ind AS requires all business combinations (..) ... to be accounted as per the acquisition method of accounting, irrespective of the legal form ....?
art. (amit somani)
asomani.personal@gmail.com
On IFRS >
Rumblings <<<<<
- 15 Mar 2014
- 09 Feb 2014
- 02 Jan 2013
- 19 Jun 2013
- 21 Jul 2013
- 28 Oct 2010
ACCOUNTING and AUDIT (A/C Standards, et al)
Tax
Will it be possible for one group to pay cash to a
dissenting....
S. 4 : Income - Capital Receipt - Affirmative
Voting Rights – [S. 2(14)]
Amount received by assessee for affirmative voting
on a resolution was not a business receipt, but received as bounty or wind fall
for voting affirmatively and supporting a resolution and was a capital receipt.
Amount received by Assessee as casual receipt in the nature of windfall and not
repetitive in character would not amount to income and therefore, not liable to
tax.
CIT vs. David
Lopes Menezes (2010) 195 Taxman 131 / (2010) Vol. 112 (10) Bom. L. R. 4655
TAX BY MANISH: Case Laws Update - June 2013
SEBI
ICL
< SEE COMMENTS
The SC decision can also be looked at from a different
angle. The SEBI‘s view has been scoffed at by impliedly holding that any action
of a businessman taken wholly and exclusively for commercial reasons /considerations
ought not to be disregarded or varied but be honored. This, in essence, is nothing but akin to the long accepted and followed as
settled law in tax cases on the proposition that it is not open to the
department (the Revenue authorities) to
adopt a subjective standard of ‘reasonableness’. Further, according to a view, SEBI cannot be
regarded to have acted within its vested powers; for, it has no power to ignore
, for whatever reason, the “legal form” of the transaction.
By the way, another instance that has surfaced seeking to
give precedence to “substance” over “legal form” that has provoked likewise an anxious consideration in one’s mind but
requires an in-depth deliberation is this:
In an attempt to explain in somewhat great details what the
proposed new accounting standard Ind S 7
the write-up published in ......
(<to complete)
KEY Note:
The common thread passing through each of the three fabrics- LAW (court litigation and Rulings), Accounting and SEBI , if critically viewed, may be realized to be that woven out of the grey area of controversy, - Form v Substance.
1. Vodafone (HC)-
Xtract >
< In terms of the applicable provisions in the case of a non-resident, only a transfer of shares held in an Indian company can give rise to taxation in India. Accordingly, Vodafone’s basic contention was that the transfer made in its favour was factually and actually only of the shareholding of HTIL (both directly and indirectly) in another foreign company, and therefore, not liable for taxation in India. Further that, therefore, section 195 was not attracted and, accordingly, no action can be taken under section 201. However, the revenue had not accepted but proceeded against Vodafone for the reasons/on the grounds already noted.
In essence/effect, what the revenue was really seeking to do was not to go by the ‘form’ of the transaction, instead, go behind it with a view to, ascertaining the ‘substance’ (the true nature) of the transaction. As such, the point of controversy basically is, - as to whether at all it is permissible for the revenue to do so under the law, whatever be the compulsions or extraneous reasons for the revenue for doing so. It calls for a special noting that, prima facie, on this aspect, the opinion of courts in a number of decided cases do not go to support the revenue. (Refer the commentary in the Book on Income-tax by Kanga, Palkhivala, and Vyas, Ninth Edition, Vol. I. at Page 61 - Head - 61. Disposition of Property so as not to Attract Tax: ‘Form’ and ‘Substance’).>
2. SEBI
Supreme Court on Non-Compete Fee Under the Takeover Regulations
xtract>
Although SEBI is mandated to protect the
interest of all investors and can question the payment of a non-compete fee or
for that matter, even has the ability to intervene and question the merits of
the decision taken by the parties involved in a transaction, following are some
of the key takeaways from the Supreme Court ruling:
(a) commercial decisions of the parties
should be respected, unless there are good reasons not to do so;
(b) it is imperative to give sufficient elbow
room to commercial entities for entering into a business transaction and host
of considerations go into business relations; and
(c) threat perception cannot be decided on
the basis of hindsight, but must be left to the commercial wisdom of the
players on the field.
3. Ind AS (s!)
As summed up :
ICAI e-Journal (September 2014 - PDF Download) - The ...
Law is an ass; most certainly, AS cannot afford to be so. For the simple reason, it is not left to an accountant or auditor, whether in accounting for financial implications of any business transaction, not barring those falling under the enumerated categories, client must follow and go not by the "legal form" but by the "substance".
Consider, - ...
However much you try not to and steer away from the whirlpool of ..., unwittingly obliged and helplessly veer round to the centre of ...gravitated to ..
With the utmost care taken to blend all apiece, one integrated , with no frills, then alone scope for eschewing disputes and ard off litigation ...
Quote NAP on ..
KNown Method of Accounting 3- Cash, Mercantile, Mixed
mixed certainly not to such an extent as to render or defeat the very purpose of or ojects/objective of accounting
not to get into more and more insurmountable s but try and obviate, if not avoid, the pitfalls, hardships, to be faced or confronted with
RBI
(on its part, adds own contribution >)
RBI Allows FDI against “Legitimate Dues”
By way of a notification issued on
September 17, 2014, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has now allowed......
However, this
is subject to
compliance with the terms and conditions of the FDI policy, including sectoral caps, pricing guidelines, etc., and also applicable tax laws.
“........remittance
of which does
not require prior permission of the Government of India or Reserve Bank of
India under FEMA, 1999 or any rules/regulations framed or directions issued
there under”.
“.....However,
this is SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF FDI policy,
including sectoral caps, pricing guidelines, etc., and also applicable tax laws."
<> NO(ooo)
doubt, this is prima facie a liberalization
measure, which is tantamount to the lately repeated gimmick of roll back to certain extent, of the erstwhile rigid requirements.
However, going by one’s own understanding, the so-permitted issue of shares through
the so-called “automatic route”, and that too limited to/ against “legitimate
dues”, if perceptively viewed , is noted to have mindlessly, and with no
purpose to be served, is tagged on to certain requirements, in fine print. The
not-so-obvious imponderables, in the “form of terms and conditions”, are left
to be gathered from the rider:
“.....However,
this is SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF FDI policy, INCLUDING
sectoral caps, pricing guidelines, etc., and also applicable tax laws.”
The point in
mind is this: Despite such shares issue being allowed via the “automatic”
route, it is nonetheless kept open to be gone into/questioned, in hind sight, on
anyone or more of the indicated grounds. For that matter, whether or not a
given case falls squarely within the parameters of so-said “legitimate dues”, by itself, is an area fraught with obvious
impracticalities; may be, requiring a detailed probe/investigation by an
authority adequately equipped i.e. for no less than CBI or SFIO
Open to EDIT;
and to share differing views, if any.
Add-on:
Add-on:
Search Results (selected)
(SFIO)
BL
NPPA guideline withdrawal: Sending the ‘right signals’ or ‘course correction’?
The drug price regulator’s move to withdraw internal guidelines that it had issued in May ha... »
<BS
Xtract :
".....had sought the Law Ministry’s opinion on the regulator’s capping of prices of drugs that were otherwise outside price control. NPPA had invoked Paragraph 19 in the Drugs Price Control Order (DPCO), 2013 — this empowered it to order a reduction in the price of medicines in “extraordinary” circumstances in the public interest."
What is "Public Interest" - Perceptions and Perspective, same way as "subjective" and "objective", depending on the viewer, could differ ?!
<> Having been provoked by certain developments to altruistically canvass, in the larger public interests, in one's conviction, , similar right signals and course correction are required to be taken on and diligently pursued with regard to the other regulators as well; and, on a war footing. For instance, for one such case on point , attention may be invited to , -
As
viewed, the SC decision can also be looked at from a different angle. The
SEBI‘s view has been scoffed at by impliedly holding that any action of a
businessman taken wholly and exclusively for commercial reasons /considerations
ought not to be disregarded or varied but be honoured. This, in essence, is nothing but akin to the long accepted and followed as
settled law in tax cases on the proposition that it is not open to the
department (the Revenue authorities) to
adopt a subjective standard of ‘reasonableness’. Further, according to a view, SEBI cannot be
regarded to have acted within its vested powers; for, it has no power to ignore,
for whatever reason, the “legal form” of the transaction.
By the
way, another instance that has surfaced seeking to give precedence to
“substance” over “legal form” that has provoked likewise an anxious
consideration in one’s mind but requires an in-depth deliberation is the new accounting
standard , Ind S 7 .
To be
brief, for sampling, in one’s understanding of the aspect of major concern in
the Ind- As is its
requirement, in essence to the effect that,
that all business combinations, to be recorded as per the “acquisition method” of
accounting, has to be irrespective of the “legal form”. Does this
not bring to surface once again the ongoing tug of war, and the enduring inconclusive
controversy, between, - “Form” and “Substance”? Should that be so, the point is,
why and how, the accounting person could conceivably be ordained to, rightly so,
and the auditor be empowered to insist, ‘substance’ be the deciding criterion
for the purpose.
The above are thrown up mainly with a view to have own thoughts clarified;
albeit, it is for the accounting and other experts at large, duly equipped, to consider
independently, and come out with a contrary but well-reasoned view , if any.
No comments:
Post a Comment