1
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
July 2010
2
CPE AND OTHER PROGRAMS - July-August 2010 Date/Day
Topic /Speaker
Venue/Time
CPE Credit
01.07.10 Thursday
CA DAY - Flag Hoisting and CA Day Programmes Chief Guest: CA. D.L. Suresh Babu
Branch Premises 09.30am to 10.30am
03.07.10 & 04.07.10 Saturday & Sunday
CAAT - MS Excel as an Audit Tool CA. Shivakumar H (for registered delegates only)
Bangalore Branch Computer Center 10.00am to 05.00pm
12hrs
07.07.10 Wednesday
Working Capital Appraisals by the Banks CA. V.V.S. Rao
Branch Premises 06.00pm to 08.00pm
2 hrs
14.07.10 Wednesday
Easy Exit Scheme 2010 AND Company Law Settlement Scheme 2010 Mr. B.N. Harish, ROC, Karnataka & CA. Ravi Prasad
Branch Premises 06.00pm to 08.00pm
2 hrs
17.07.10 & 18.07.10 Saturday & Sunday
CAAT - MS Excel as an Audit Tool CA. Shivakumar H (for registered delegates only)
Bangalore Branch Computer Center 10.00am to 05.00pm
12hrs
21.07.10 Wednesday
Practical issues - IT Returns of Non Corporate and Non Audit Cases CA. H. Ganpatlal Kawad
Branch Premises 06.00pm to 08.00pm
2 hrs
24.07.10 Saturday
Due Diligence and Business Valuation for Mergers & Acquisitions CA. Arun Kumar M.K and Ms. C.G. Srividya Delegate Fee: Rs. 250/-
Branch Premises 09.30 am to 01.30pm
4 hrs
27.07.10 Tuesday
48th Annual General Meeting
Branch Premises 6.30 PM
28.07.10 Wednesday
Direct Tax Code Revised Discussion Paper CA. S. Ramanujam
Branch Premises 06.00pm to 08.00pm
2 hrs
04.08.10 Wednesday
Foreign Direct Investment Mr. N.L. Mitra
Branch Premises 06.00pm to 08.00pm
2 hrs
––
––
Note : High Tea at 5.30 pm for programmes at 6.00 pm at branch premises. Advertisement Tariff for the Branch Newsletter Colour full page Inside Black & White Outside back Rs. 30,000/Full page Rs. 15,000/Inside front Rs. 24,000/Half page Rs. 8,000/Inside back Rs. 24,000/Quarter page Rs. 4,000/Advt. material should reach us before 22nd of previous month.
Editor
: CA. Shambhu Sharma H.
Sub Editor : CA. Prasad S.R.
DISCLAIMER : The Bangalore Branch of ICAI is not in anyway responsible for the result of any action taken on the basis of the advertisement published in the newsletter. The members, however, bear in mind the provision of the code of ethics while responding to the advertisements. The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Branch Newsletter are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Bangalore Branch of ICAI.
3
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
TAX UPDATES MAY 2010 CA. Chythanya K.K., B.Com, FCA, LL.B, Advocate
VAT, CST, ENTRY TAX, PROFESSIONAL TAX PARTS DIGESTED: a) 2010-11(15) KCTJ Part 2 b) 2010 (68) KLJ Part 5 c) 28 VST – Part 5 d) 30 VST – Part 1 to 4 Reference/Description 2010 (68) Kar. L.J. 575 (HC) : S.P. Fabricators Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore North Taluk v. The JCCT (Administrative), DVO-6, Bangalore & others In the instant case the assessee had deposited an amount representing one-half of the disputed tax in compliance with condition for preferring appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, against the assessment order. The assessee thereafter was successful in the appeal and became entitled to refund of amount there of. Hence the assessee made a representation for adjusting the amount due to be refunded against tax due from him for a different assessment year. However the same was not responded to. The assessee therefore approached the Honourable High Court of Karnataka with a Writ Petition for issuance of direction to authority not to take coercive steps to recover tax due till decision is taken. The High Court disposed off the Writ by noting that since an undertaking has been given on behalf of authority that no coercive steps would be taken till decision is made on representation, nothing survives for consideration in the said writ petition.
INCOME TAX PARTS DIGESTED: a) 323 ITR – Part 1 to 5 b) 189 Taxman – Part 3 to 5
July 2010
4
c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m)
190 Taxman – Part 1 1 ITR(Trib) – Part 9 2 ITR(Trib) – Part 1 to 3 & 5 to 7 122 ITD – Part 4 123 ITD – Part 9 124 ITD – Part 1 to 4 129 TTJ – Part 6 130 TTJ – Part 1 to 3 42-A BCAJ – Part 2 58 TCA – Part 11 CAPJ Reference/Description
[2010] 323 ITR 6 (Ker) HC : CIT v. Mangalam Publications In the instant case the Kerala High Court that that where an assessee is required to maintain books of account returns income on estimation basis, then the assessee cannot claim that it has fully and truly disclosed all material facts required for the assessment. Further even where the books were not maintained the assessee had not disclosed full material particulars even as required by section 139(9)(f), which in effect rendered the return defective. In such a scenario the High Court felt that the reassessment was not barred by limitation. [2010] 323 ITR 130 (Delhi) HC : Van Oord Acz India (P) Ltd. v. CIT In the instant case the Delhi High Court held that the liability to deduct tax at source arises only when sum paid to nonresident is chargeable to tax in India. In a case where mobilization and demobilization costs were reimbursed to non-resident the same was not taxable in India and therefore there did not arise a liability under section 195 or the consequential impact of section 40(a)(i). This is another decision that goes to say the ruling in Samsung (185 Taxman 313
Kar.) is not correct. For similar judgements refer Amiantit International Holding Ltd., In re [2010] 322 ITR 678 (AAR) & CIT (International Taxation) & another v. Illinois Institute of Technology (India) P. Ltd. [2010] 321 ITR 49 (Karn). [2010] 323 ITR 166 (SC) : Vijaya Bank v. CIT & another The Apex Court in the instant case with regard to the provisions of section 36(1)(vii) observed that mere debit to profit and loss account was not sufficient for claiming of deduction under the section as per the amendment in the law after April 1, 1989. To claim deduction the same requires a simultaneous obliteration of provision from accounts by reduction from “Loans and Advances” or “Debtors” on assets side by the Balance Sheet and thereafter the same amounts to writing off for grant of deduction. The Apex Court held that the disallowance for failure to close individual account of each debtor in account books was not justified more so when the department was empowered to tax subsequent repayments under section 41(4). It also noted that the aforesaid understanding applied to banking as well as nonbanking assessee. Although the aforesaid decision is useful for the proposition that individual debtors’ accounts need not be credited for bad debts, its suggestion that any reduction shown from sundry debtors in the balance sheet amounts to write off stems from lack of accounting knowledge. Even provision for doubtful debts is shown as reduction from sundry debtors and the above decision seems to suggest that such reflection amounts to write off. [2010] 323 ITR 178 (Bom) HC : CIT v. B.N. Exports In the instant case the Bombay High Court, finding that insurance was for benefit of firm, held
that the insurance premium on keyman insurance policy to insure life of partner was allowable as a deduction as business expenditure under section 37. A reference was made to section 10(10D) and Circular No. 762 dt. 182-1998 (para 14.1 to 14.5) which explicitly provided for such a deduction. This could be an interesting tax planning for a firm. While the premiums are allowed as deduction in the hands of the firm, subsequent transfer by firm to partner at surrender value will have no tax implications on either. Further, upon such assignment, the policy ceases to be keyman so that the recipient partner enjoys exemption under sec 10(10D). [2010] 323 ITR 249 (Delhi) HC: DIT v. Society for Worldwide Inter Bank Financial Telecommunications In the instant case the Delhi High Court observed that a notice under section 143(2) served upon assessee even before the filing of return was not a valid one and the assessment completed on basis of the said notice was therefore invalid. In the instant case the notice it seems was served four days before the filing of the return and it was later on contended by the department that the same was served on the authorized representative simultaneously on his filing the return! The High Court noted that if that were the circumstance then it clearly indicated that the notice was ready even prior to the filing of the return! The High Court held that the said notice could have been issued only upon examination of the return and not prearranged! [2010] 323 ITR 305 (Delhi) HC : Soul v. Deputy CIT In the instant case where the assessed income was 74 times the returned income, the Delhi High Court observed that the same was an unreasonably high pitched assessment. In view of the instruction no.1914,
dated 2.12.1993 wherein it was stated that the higher authority could interfere with the decision of the AO in exceptional circumstance, the High Court observed that the present circumstance amounted to an exceptional one and therefore held that the notices of demand had to be kept in abeyance till the jurisdictional Commissioner decided the application for stay. The above decision ruled that despite instruction no.1914 being made specifically overriding earlier instructions, the earlier instruction no.96 which defined assessment at twice the returned income as highpitched very much survives. [2010] 323 ITR 346 (Mad) HC : CIT v. TCP Ltd. The Madras High Court held that where the limitation for issue of notice under section 143(2) for assessment had not expired, notice under section 148 could not have been issued. Though the laws are explicit, verdict of the judiciary is sometimes essential to check the impulsiveness of the department to resort to stringent provisions even before using up the basic provisions (in fact in all matters be it assessment, recovery etc.) [2010] 323 ITR 368 (HP) HC : CIT v. Anil Hardware Store In the instant case the Himachal Pradesh High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal wherein it was held that the remuneration payable to the partners of a firm had to be in the same proportion in which the profit and losses are to be distributed to them, even though there was no such provision in the partnership deed and only the upper limit of remuneration payable had been fixed according to section 40(b)(v). It was further observed that when the partnership deed provides the method of remuneration but lesser remuneration is paid, obviously, the assessee cannot
take the benefit of the remuneration which could have been paid but has not been actually paid. Thus, it was held that mentioning remuneration payable to each partner is not necessary although circular no.739 insisted on the same. [2010] 323 ITR 380 (AAR) : Royal Bank of Canada, In re In the instant case the AAR, with reference to the Agreement for the Avoidance of the Double Taxation between India and Canada, held that the income of the non-resident from derivative transitions was of nature of “business income” and in view of Article 7(1) (where the assessee did not have a permanent establishment in India) the same was not liable to tax India. [2010] 323 ITR 397 (SC) : T.R.F. Ltd. v. CIT The Apex Court in the instant case again in the context of section 36(1)(vii) observed that, the law after April 1, 1989 required the assessee only to establish that debt was written off and it was not necessary to establish that debt in fact had become irrecoverable.Observing the procedure the Apex Court noted that, when a bad debt occurs, the bad debt account is debited and the customer’s account is credited, thus, closing the account of the customer. In the case of companies, the provision is deducted from sundry debtors. [2010] 323 ITR 452 (Karn) : Dinakar Ullal v. CIT In the instant case the High Court of Karnataka observed that the power to issue instructions could not override the provisions of the Act. This was rendered in the context of CBDT Instruction No. 12 of 2006 dated 30.10.2003 wherein in the context of condonation of delay for claiming refund the instruction provided that the interest should not be demanded! The high court held that the above instruction in so far as it spoke on non
5
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
grant of interest is bad and unenforceable. [2010] 323 ITR 490(Delhi) : CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd In the instant case the property was given on rent and there was interest free deposit. The Delhi High Court had to consider if the notional interest was either business income or income from house property. In view of the provisions of ss. 23(1)(a) and 28(iv) the High Court held that such notional income was neither assessable as business income nor as income from property. [2010] 323 ITR (St.) 46 : Director of Income-tax v. General Electric International Inc The apex court dismissed the Department’s special leave petition against the judgment dated June 22, 2009 of the Bombay High Court in ITA No. 890 of 2009, whereby the High Court following 313 ITR 187 held that when a duty was cast on the payer to deduct the tax at source, on failure of the payer to do so, no interest could be imposed on the assessee under section 234B. [2010] 323 ITR (St.) 56 In section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, in sub-section (3), for the words “three lakhs and fifty thousand rupees”, the words “ten lakhs rupees” has been substituted. [2010] 189 Taxman (BN – iii) Part 5 (ITAT- Mum) : Intervet India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT In the context of the Transfer pricing provisions the Tribunal observed that the mere geographical contiguity of two countries did not imply the similarity in the economic or market conditions. The Tribunal noted that the sale prices to wholesale agents in two different countries were not comparable, when the sale price to the final user in the one country was less than the sale price to the wholesale agent in another country, unless adjustment for the same has been
July 2010
6
considered. Thus, the adjustments merely for volume off take, credit period and credit risk, though material were not sufficient to make the sale price to AE in Thailand comparable with the sale to unrelated party in Vietnam. [2010] 2 ITR (Trib) 746 (Chennai): R.S. Suriya v. Deputy CIT In the instant case the Tribunal held that where the payments were made for managing call sheets of the assessee, the same could not be regarded as professional services for the purposes of deduction of tax. The Tribunal observed that the expertise required for maintaining call sheets (giving dates) could not be considered to be of a level sufficient to be called as “professional services”. Neither any professional qualification was required for giving such services, nor could the Assessing Officer show that such services were rendered by any professionals. Further in the context of system of accounting and liability to tax the Tribunal observed that just because the assessee was following the cash system, it was not obliged to consider all sums received by it as income unless such receipt could be categorized as income. Whether it is the cash system or the mercantile system, a receipt can be treated as income only if such income can be considered as recognized. Just because the assessee had received an amount of advance such sum cannot be treated as income, only for a reasoning that it was following the cash system of accounting. [2010] 129 TTJ (Chennai) (SB) 641: ITO (International Taxation) v. Prasad Production Ltd. Similar to the judgement of the Delhi HC in the case Van Oord Acz India (P) Ltd. (supra) the Chennai Tribunal held that the person making payment to the non-resident would be liable to deduct tax only if
the payment so made was chargeable to tax under the Act. The Hon. Special bench chose not to follow the Samsung case. The decision of the special bench will operate for whole of India except Karnataka thanks to Samsung case. The Samsung case is expected to come up before the Supreme Court on 18.8.2010 and it is hoped that the Supreme Court would reverse the decision of Karnataka High Court. [2010] 129 TTJ (Bang) 680 : Prestige Estate Projects (P) Ltd. v. Deputy CIT In the instant case the assessee developer had been regularly employing project completion method an accepted method of accounting as per Accounting Standard-7, though the same has not been specified by the Central Government under s. 145(2). The Tribunal held that the AO could not reject the accounts under s. 145(3) on the ground that the assessee had not followed the prescribed method of accounting. Moreover, assessee was under bona fide belief that it was adopting a method of accounting which was applicable to it as per the report of the Expert Committee of the ICAI. Therefore, the revised AS-7 could not be applied in the case of the assessee. Further even otherwise, in case revised AS – 7 was to be applied, the opening inventories were to be valued as per revised AS – 7. It was further noted that with regard to the principle of consistency, the Revenue should have accepted the method of accounting adopted by the assessee as the same was being followed for many years.Further the assessee was not the owner of the building (mall) and the same was acquired by it on lease. The Tribunal held that the rental receipts derived by it by leasing out the same to the tenants could not be taxed under the head ‘income from house property’ as the assessee had leased out the premises
along with various amenities and services, permitting each of the tenants to use the same only for a specific business subject to stringent terms and conditions as specified in the lease agreement. Therefore the obvious intention of the assessee was to commercially exploit the mall and not simply to earn rental income and, therefore, the rental income was to be assessed as business income.
[2010] 42-A BCAJ 25 (ITATAhmedabad) : Sun Petrochemicals Pvt. Ld. v. ITO The Tribunal held that the assessee was not liable to pay interest u/s. 234B when by retrospective amendment made later the amount becomes taxable. The fact that administrative relief can be obtained by the assessee cannot erode the powers of the Tribunal while dealing with a valid appeal laid before it.
[2010] 42 - A BCAJ 24 : Teja Constructions v. ACIT The Tribunal noted that when it was held that the books of account of the assessee were not relied and they were rejected by the Assessing Officer, his basing reliance on the same books, for the purpose of invoking the provisions of S. 40(a)(ia) was improper. The estimation of income takes care of the irregularities committed by the assessee. Further addition by invoking S. 40(a)(ia) amounts to punishing the assessee for a same offence on double occasions, which is not permitted by law.Further, it was held that the bare provisions of S. 40(a)(ia) provides for non-deduction of amount which remains payable to a resident in respect of fees for technical services, etc. It is not applicable where expenditure is paid. It is applicable only in cases where the payments are due and outstanding. Section 40(a)(ia) otherwise being a legal fiction needs to be construed strictly in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Mother India Refrigeration Industries (P) Ltd. (155 ITR 711). If the assessee has paid the impugned amount and it is not payable at the end of the year on the date of balance sheet, then the provisions of S. 40(a)(ia) are not applicable. It is only applicable in respect of ‘payable amount’ shown in the balance sheet as outstanding expenses on which TDS has not been made.
[2010] 42-A BCAJ 28 (ITAT-Mumbai) : Radial Marketing (P) Ltd. v. ITO The Tribunal referred to the CBDT Circular issued with reference to the payments made under ‘Own Your Telephone’ Scheme of MTNL. It noted that as per the Circular the amount paid for the purchase of handsets was allowable as revenue expenditure. In view thereof, it allowed the claim of the assessee. As regards the amount paid for talk-time, it agreed with the assessee that it cannot be treated as capital in nature as the same was not for any capital assets. Reliance was placed on CBDT Circular No. 204/70/75-IT (All) dt. 10-5-1976 which dealt with OYT deposit. [2010] 30 CAPJ (St.) 439 : STATUTES. Press Release– No. 402/ 92/2006-MC (20 of 2010), dt. 29.04.2010The Central Government has notified the “Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China” as specified territory for the purpose of Explanation 2 to section 90 of the Income Tax Act 1961 vide Notification No. 25 of 2010 (F.No. 400/124/9-FTD-II). The notification enables the Central Government to enter into a double taxation avoidance agreement with SAR of Hong Kong.Earlier (i) Bermuda, (ii) British Virgin Islands, (iii) Cayman Islands, (iv) Gibraltar, (all British Overseas Territories); (v) Guernsey, (vi) Isle of Man, (vii) Jersey, (all British Crown Dependencies); and
(viii) Netherlands Antilles (an Autonomous Part of Kingdom of Netherlands); and (ix) Macau (a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China) had been notified, enabling the Central Government to initiate and negotiate agreements for exchange of information for the prevention of evasion or avoidance of income tax and assistance in collection of income tax with the nine specified territories. [2010] 30 CAPJ 456 (Bombay HC): Shri Jethmal Faujimal Soni v. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and Ors. The Bombay High Court observed that the third proviso to Section 254(2A), as inserted by the Finance Act of 2008, with effect from 01.10.2008, is a stringent provision which provides that if there is a delay in disposing of the appeal within the period allowed under the first proviso or the extended period allowed under the second proviso, which shall not, in any case, exceed 365 days, the order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of such period or periods, even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the Assessee. It is the duty and obligation of the Tribunal to ensure that the Appeal is disposed of, so as to not result in prejudice to the Assessee. The High Court held that in the present case, the fact that an issue was pending before the Special Bench was not reason for the Tribunal not to dispose of the Appeal. The Tribunal was directed to dispose of the pending appeal within the period directed by the Court. [2010] 30 CAPJ 502 In the Employee’s State Insurance (Central) Rules, 1950, in Rule 50, for the words “ten thousand”, wherever they occur, the words “fifteen thousand” shall be substituted. This has widened the scope of ESI coverage.
7
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
RECENT JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN INDIRECT TAXES CA. N.R. Badrinath, Grad C.W.A., F.C.A., CA. Madhur Harlalka, B. Com., F.C.A.
SERVICE TAX Turnkey contracts The issue discussed in the present case is whether turnkey or composite contracts are chargeable to service tax. The term service generally means service of any description made available to potential user, which may be contractual, professional, public, domestic; legal, statutory, etc. in case where services are provided integrally, permutation and combination of services does not change the character of the service. In a composite contract comprising various activities of different nature of services, difficulty may arise only in determination of assessable value of such services involved in the contracts. But the Constitution of India enables the determination of value of goods segregating the same from different elements of service involved in these contracts. Thus the submissions of interveners and respondents that the segregation of service element involved in a composite contract or turnkey contract is not permitted and tax on service elements is not leviable is not tenable in law. Segregation of service element from goods involved in the above nature of contracts is permissible when sale of goods involved in such contract is segregated under the constitutional provisions. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur vs. BSBK Private Limited. 2010 (18) S.T.R 555 (Tri-LB)] The issue resolved in this case was whether the turnkey contract is
July 2010
8
leviable for sales tax. The revenue contended that when Constitution had permitted turnkey contract divisible for levy of sales tax by States, it had equal application under the Constitution for levy of service tax on the discernible service elements of such contracts. However, it was held that severability of composite and turnkey contracts permitted by Constitution cannot be said to have been for the purpose of levy of sales tax. Severability of composite contracts provides for levy of service tax on taxable services, which was set out in the case of Imagic Creative Private Limited (Supra). Therefore it was held that in case of a turnkey contract which involves a cluster of activities in the nature of services which are provided incorporating goods at the time of providing the service, the Constitution has permitted the division of such contracts to find out the goods component and the value thereof wherein the remnant part may be attributable to the scope of service tax. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur vs. BSBK Private Limited. 2010 (18) S.T.R 555 (Tri-LB)] The issue discussed in the present case is whether turnkey contract or composite contract is divisible for levy of service tax. In the case of Gannon Dunkerley & Co vs. State of Rajasthan (1993) 88 STC 204 (SC) the Supreme Court has held that in case of composite works contract which involves supply of both materials and labour, the cost of establishment of the contractor would
have to be apportioned between the part of the contract relating to supply of materials and labour. The cost of establishment relatable to supply of materials cannot be included with the cost of supplying the labour. The same is the case for the profits as well. Thus the value of goods involved in the execution of works contract is to be determined after deducting the cost incurred and profit earned from the supply of labour and services. After the value of goods involved in the composite contract is arrived at, the remnant part of such contract is attributable to the service element which is chargeable to service tax. In the light of the provisions, it was held that the turnkey contracts are divisible and the part attributable to the services rendered shall be subject to the levy of service tax. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur vs. BSBK Private Limited. 2010 (18) S.T.R 555 (Tri-LB)] Refund The issue in this case related to the refund of service tax on input services used in output services exported. The appellants had availed credit of the duty paid on the inputs used in the output services exported and since being unable to utilize the same, they filed a refund claim which was initially allowed by the original authority. However, the jurisdictional Commissioner passed the impugned revision orders wherein a part of the refund was denied on the ground that the impugned amount of tax has not been paid to the Government by the service providers supplying the input services. Later, on appeal it was held that as per Rule 3 and 4 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, credit of service tax paid on input service shall be allowed on or after the day on which payment is made towards the value of input service and the service tax as indicated in the bill. The fact that the service provider has not paid the
service tax to the Government does not make the appellants ineligible for the refund of service tax paid by them on the input services. Hence the appeals were allowed with consequential benefit to the appellants. [Lason India Private Limited vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai. 2010 (18) S.T.R 626 (Tri-Chennai)]. Stay/ Dispensation of Pre-Deposit The issue involved in the present case relates to the reversal of Cenvat credit of service tax. The appellants were rendering services to the units located in Special Economic Zone (‘SEZ’) and non SEZ units using common inputs. The revenue contended that since the services rendered to SEZ units are exempted, the appellants are liable to pay an amount equal to 8% of the value of the services as they were also providing dutiable services. However, it was held that the services rendered to an unit of the SEZ by an unit in DTA is treated as export of service as per the provisions of SEZ Act, 2005. Accordingly the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts were allowed and recovery thereof was stayed till the disposal of the appeals. [Sobha Developers Ltmited vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore. 2010 (18) S.T.R 620 (TriBang)] Technical Testing and Analysis The issue in the present case related to the taxability of technical testing and analysis service. The appellants were engaged in the activity of clinical research / testing and analysis service for various pharmaceutical companies. The revenue issued show cause notices on the appellants as to why service tax should not be recovered from them for the services rendered prior to 1st May 2006 based on the amendment made on the said date on the ground that the
amendment is retrospective in effect. The amendment was made to specifically exclude testing or analysis only for determination of the nature of diseased condition, identification of disease, prevention of any disease in human beings or animals. The appellants did not dispute the payment of service tax for the period after 1 st May 2006. However, based on the various citations and analysis of facts, it was held that the amendment was not retrospective in effect and the appeal was allowed. [B.A. Research India Limited vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmedabad. 2010 (18) S.T.R 604 (Tri-Ahmd.)] Valuation The matter discussed in the present case relates to the valuation of taxable services. The appellants were engaged in providing commercial or industrial construction service and were paying service tax under Notification No. 15/2004-ST dated 10th September 2004. The department denied the benefit of the said notification on the ground that the appellant had to include the value of the pipes provided by the service receiver free of cost which, the appellants had excluded in determining the value of taxable service. The appellants contended that section 67 of Finance Act, 1994 defines the value as gross amount charged by the service provider and if money is not charged, the same shall not form part of the value of taxable service. However, it was held that the supply of pipes by receiver is an essential component for providing pipeline laying service and has to be included in the value as consideration other than cash. Hence if the value of the pipes in not included in the value, the appellants would not be eligible for abatement under the said notification. [Jiahind
Projects Limited vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Ahmedabad. 2010 (18) S.T.R 650 (Tri-Ahmd.)] The issue here relates to the valuation of taxable service. The respondent assessee was engaged in rendering service relating to photography, developing and printing and had availed the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST dated 20 th June 2003. The revenue claimed that the benefit of the said notification is not available as the assessee had not sold the materials/ goods to the recipient of service and accordingly issued show cause notice. The adjudicating authority, relying on the clarification of the Central Board of Excise and Customs dropped the proceedings initiated in pursuance of show cause notice. Later the revisional authority passed an impugned order wherein the demand was confirmed and also penalty was imposed for nonpayment of service tax. However, on appeal it was held that photography films, printing papers, chemicals and envelopes are the integral and essential ingredients to complete the process of photography which, is in the nature of works contract and involves both the elements of sale and service. Service tax is therefore not leviable on the sale portion. Hence the impugned order was maintained thereby dismissing the appeal.[Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Vahoo Colour Lab. 2010 (18) S.T.R 548 (P & H)] Works Contract The issue resolved in the present case was the taxability of works contract. The assessee was engaged in providing storage and warehousing, port services and consulting engineering services who filed a refund claim for September and October 2003 under the heading Commissioning and Installation on the ground that lump sum turnkey
9
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
works contract was entered into by them which could not be split into individual components for levy of service tax. Since the value of services had been shown separately in the acceptance letter, show cause notice was issued to the assessee proposing to reject the refund claim. However, it was held that works contract service was introduced from 1 st June 2007 and service tax is leviable on the service portion involved in the works contract only after the said date. Service tax was not leviable on the value of materials sold during works contract and the 46th amendment to Constitution does not empower the levy of tax on service component of works contract. Since the works contract was executed before 1st June 2007, such contracts are not exigible to service tax and as a result refund was allowed. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad vs. Indian Oil Tanking Limited. 2010 (18) S.T.R 577 (TriMumbai)]
VALUE ADDED TAX The matter for discussion in the present case was whether production of form C constitutes sufficient proof for the physical transport of goods from one state to another. The respondent-dealer was engaged in the sale of products manufactured by it outside Kerala and the local office was a selling branch engaged mostly in local sales. During 1999-2000, the dealer accounted inter-State sales to Mahe and produced C forms to claim the concessional rate of tax. However, the assessing officer demanded proof of transport of goods from the depot in Kerala to the buyer in Mahe, which the dealer failed to produce. As a result, the C forms were rejected and the turnover was assessed under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The Tribunal based on the C forms allowed the
July 2010
10
appeals. However, on a revision petition it was held that, the order of Tribunal allowing the appeal just based on the C forms produced was not sustainable and the dealer should be granted an opportunity to produce the available proof of inter-State movement of goods before the assessing officer. If the dealer provides proof for substantial quantity of the turnover, the entire claim shall be allowed. Else the Tribunal’s order shall stand reversed and the assessment made under the Kerala Act stand confirmed. [State of Kerala vs. Crompton Greaves Limited. 2010 (30) VST 426 (Ker)] The issue involved in the present case was whether transfer of motor car by a firm to its partners on its dissolution in lieu of partners share can be considered as sale. Under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 a firm does not have a distinct legal identity from its partners and the firm does not have separate right on the partnership assets on which all partners have a joint or common interest. The distribution of assets among the partners upon dissolution after the discharge of liabilities is a mutual adjustment of rights between the partners and does not involve extinguishment of firm’s rights in the partnership assets under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. In order to constitute a sale as defined under the said Act, there should be an agreement between the parties for the purpose of transferring title to goods which should be supported by money consideration and the property must actually pass in goods as a result of the transaction. Accordingly it was held that the transfer of motor car by the firm to its partner upon dissolution does not constitute a sale. [Synthetic Suppliers vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Mumbai. 2010 (30) VST 632 (Bom)]
The issue here was whether physical transfer of goods from principal to consignment agents amounts to sale. The petitioners-dealers who were engaged in the business of sale of goods filed writ petitions for quashing of notices demanding tax under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 in respect of the goods transferred to their agents in Delhi on consignment basis. It was held that, the transfer of property in goods constitutes sale and not the transfer of goods under the said Act. Therefore, the transaction between the principal and consignment agent does not constitute sale unless there was transfer of property in goods. The written agreements between the petitioners and their agents stated that the goods were sold by the agents on behalf of the petitioners which implied that the title or ownership in the goods continued to vest with the petitioners. Therefore, the transactions between the petitioners and their agents cannot be considered to be sale. Mere physical transfer of goods from the premises of the principals to the premises of the agents without transfer of title in goods would not be liable to tax and hence the impugned order was set aside. [Havell’s India Limited vs. Commissioner of Value Added Tax and Another. 2010 (31) VST 20 (Delhi)]
CENTRAL EXCISE Cenvat credit The issue in the present case was related to the allowance of Cenvat credit on capital goods. The respondents had acquired capital goods from the suppliers which were used in the manufacture of finished products which were under the brandname of “Lays” and “Cheetos” and accordingly availed credit on the capital goods received by them. The credit so availed was objected by the
revenue on the ground that the Bill of Entry/ Invoices for the capital goods were not in the name of the respondents and accordingly issued show cause notices. The adjudicating authority passed order imposing penalty which was later confirmed by Commissioner (Appeals). However, on appeal it was held that credit cannot be denied to the respondent in view of the law laid down in Sharda Motors Industries Limited vs. CCE, Chennai, wherein it has been held that the ownership of the goods is no criteria for denying credit in view of the Circular of the Board dated 1st March 1999. Therefore, the respondents were entitled for the credit on capital goods when the endorsement was in their favour in the Bill of Entry by the supplier. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana vs. Pepsi Foods Limited. 2010 (254) ELT 284 (P & H)] The issue in the present case was whether credit for the duty debited through Duty Entitlement Pass Book (‘DEPB’) account is allowable. The assessee was the manufacturer of TR Belting and Conveyor Belting and was availing credit of the duty paid on inputs. The revenue claimed that the assessee had wrongly availed the credit on raw materials imported on which additional customs duty was debited from DEPB account and not paid in cash. Accordingly, the revenue issued show cause notice, the proceedings of which were set aside. However, on an appeal filed by the revenue it was held that the EXIM Policy as amended provides that an importer shall be entitled to avail the credit of additional duty leviable under section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act against the amount debited in DEPB and the revenue cannot deny the benefit of Cenvat credit to the assessee. Hence the order of adjudicating authority whereby the
proceedings were dropped and the amount of credit was refunded to the assessee was upheld. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Lidhiana vs. Neel Kanth Rubber Mills. 2010 (54) ELT 203 (P & H)] The main issue in the present case was whether the credit for the tax paid on plant housekeeping services can be allowed. The appellants filed appeal against the order of denial of Cenvat credit on the plant housekeeping services. The lower authority had denied credit to the appellants on plant housekeeping services on the ground that they are not related to the manufacture of final product and does not fall under the definition “input services”. However, on an appeal it was held that the plant cannot run without housekeeping of the plant and providing the facilities of toilet and water are the basic requirement to run the factory and non-providing of the same may affect the production. Hence maintenance of housekeeping service is essential and is related to the manufacturing activity. As a result, the Cenvat credit on plant housekeeping services was allowed. [Balkrishna Industries Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad. 2010 (254) ELT 301 (Tri-Mumbai)] The issue for discussion in the present case was whether services rendered by Chartered Accountants can be considered as input services for the purpose of availing credit of the tax paid on such services. The assessee had availed the credit of the tax paid on the professional charges of Chartered Accountant, which the revenue denied on the ground that such services are not directly related to the business and hence passed the orders which confirmed the reversal of Cenvat credit taken on professional charges. However, on appeal it was held that in the case of
Keltech Energies Limited vs. CCE, Mangalore [2008 (10) STR 280 (TriBang.)], the professional charges paid by the assessee to the Chartered Accountants can be considered as directly related to the business. On the basis of the above judgment, the credit of the tax paid on professional charges was allowed and the appeals filed by the revenue were rejected. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Visakhapatnam vs. Andhra Pradesh paper Mills Limited. 2010 (254) ELT 354 (Tri-Bang.)] The issue involved in the present case was whether oxygen/ acetylene gas can be considered as inputs for availing credit of the tax paid. The assessee used oxygen/ acetylene gas in cutting of scrap of iron and steel into smaller pieces to be fed into a furnace which was a part of integrated process connected with the ultimate production of final products and the assessee availed the credit in respect of such gas used on the manufacture. The revenue contended that the credit is not admissible on the ground that the oxygen/ acetylene gas does not qualify as inputs. However, on appeal it was held that the oxygen/ acetylene gas was used in the manufacture of final products and hence the assessee was entitled to claim credit. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh vs. Nabha Steel Private Limited. 2010 (254) ELT 252 (P & H)] Excisability The issue in the present case related to the excisability of the goods. The revenue demanded the duty to be paid on illuminated sign boards on the ground that the impugned goods are marketable since the same has been sold along with the immovable property on which it has been erected. The assessee contended that the sign boards are immovable as the board comes into existence
11
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
after erection at site and the same is huge and therefore cannot be dismantled and sold as a movable property. In case if the board is dismantled, it will no longer remain a sign board and loses its marketability. However, it was held that the illuminated sign boards and MS shells come into existence as a result of fabrication and installation at site and the same cannot be dismantled and moved from place to place and marketed. Hence the goods are not excisable and the impugned order passed by lower appellate authority requires no interference. [Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai vs. Titanium Equip. and Anode Manufacturing Co. Limited. 2010 (254) ELT 345 (Tri-Chennai)] Refund The issue in the below case related to the admissibility of the refund of Cenvat credit on export of exempted goods under bond. The respondents were the manufacturers of finished leather which was exported. The respondents claimed
refund on account of Cenvat credit on inputs under Rule 5 and 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, which was rejected by the revenue on the ground that the goods are chargeable to nil rate of duty and hence there was no need to export the goods under bond. Cenvat credit is allowed on the inputs of all manufactured goods which are not exempt from duty. However, there are exceptions where credit is allowed in respect of excisable goods which are cleared for export under bond in terms of provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Therefore it was held that an assessee manufacturing goods chargeable to nil duty is eligible to avail credit paid on the inputs. [Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Drish Shoes Limited. 2010 (254) ELT 417 (H.P)] Valuation The issue involved in the present case relates to the valuation under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessee is supplying their final product ‘cookies’ to their
institutional customers on specific contracts entered into by them and these institutional customers are supplying the cookies to their customers free of cost. The assessee was statutorily not obliged to declare the MRP on the package since the nature of clearance is in bulk and for the exclusive use of servicing industry, as a result of which the assessee had not printed the same on the package. Subsequently, the assessee printed the MRP on the package with a view to legally claim the benefit of section 4A of the Act i.e. valuation based on MRP. However, it was held that the assessee was not obliged to declare MRP on the packages and printing of MRP on packages shall not entitle the assessee to claim benefits of section 4A of the Act. Hence the contention of the department that the goods are to be valued under section 4 of the Act was upheld. [Australian Foods Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-II. 2010 (254) ELT 392 (Mad)]
Important Dates to remember during the month of July 2010 5-Jul-10
6-Jun-10 7-Jul-10 10-Jul-10 15-Jul-10
20-Jul-10 21-Jul-10 25-Jul-10 30-Jul-10 31-Jul-10
July 2010
12
- Payment of Service Tax for the month of June 2010. (in case of persons other than individual, proprietor & partnership firms) - Payment of Central Excise Duty for the month of June 2010. - Payment of Service Tax for the quarter (April to June) in case of Individual, proprietor & partnership. - E - Payment of Central Excise Duty & Service Tax for the month of June 2010. - Payment of Tax Deducted & Tax Collected in the month of June 2010. - Filing of monthly returns of Central Excise for the month of June 2010. - Due date for filling of Form 27Q for the quarter ending June. - Due date for filling of Form 24Q, 26Q & 27EQ for the quarter ending June. - Due date for filling of VAT 120 under KVAT Laws. - Payment of Provident Fund for the month of June 2010. - Due date for filling of VAT 100 under KVAT Laws. - Payment of Professional Tax for the month of June, 2010. - Payment of Employee State Insurance for the month of June 2010. - Filing of Monthly returns of Provident Fund for the month of June 2010. - Due date to issue TDS certificates (other than salaries) for the quarter (April to June) - Filling of return of income for the A.Y 2010-11 for non-corporate non audit assesses - Due date for filling of Form 26QA, 26QAA for the quarter ending June.
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SOUTHERN INDIA REGIONAL COUNCIL OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA “ICAI Bhawan”, #16/O, MILLERS TANK BED AREA, BANGALORE – 560052
NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING NOTICE is hereby given that the 48th Annual General Meeting of the members of the Bangalore Branch of Southern India Regional Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, will be held on 27th July 2010, at 6.30 pm at S.Narayanan Auditorium, “ICAI Bhawan” # 16/0, Millers Tank Bed Area, Bangalore – 560052 to transact the following business. 1.
To receive the Annual Report of the Branch for the year 2009-10.
2.
To adopt the Audited Accounts of the Branch for the year ended 31st March 2010.
3.
To transact any other business that may be brought out before the meeting with the permission of the “Chair”. By Order of the Managing Committee Sd/(CA. K. Babu) SECRETARY
Place: Date:
Bangalore 26.06.2010
Note : 1. Members are requested to bring the copy of Annual Report with them for the Annual General Meeting. 2. Members are requested to send in queries if any on Audited Financial Statements for the year ended 31-3-2010, in advance to the Branch by post or e-mail.
MANAGING COMMITTEE CA. Shambhu Sharma. H CA. Venkatesh Babu. T. R CA. Babu. K CA. Ravindranath. S.N CA. Nithin M CA. Govinda Bhat N CA. Prasad S R CA. Shivakumar H CA. Madhukar N Hiregange CA. Raghu. K CA. Srinivas C.S CA. Suresh P.R CA. Viswanath. K
Chairman Vice-Chairman Secretary Treasurer Chairman, SICASA Member Member Member Ex-officio, Central Council Ex-officio, Central Council Ex-officio, Regional Council Ex-officio, Regional Council Ex-officio, Regional Council
13
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
48th Annual Report Dear Members, We are pleased to present the 48th Annual Report of the Bangalore Branch of SIRC of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, together with the audited accounts for the year ended 31st March 2010. Bangalore Branch is one of the most active and largest Branch in the country and has successfully rendered more than four decades of service to the members and students at large. For the year 2010-11 following office bearers have been elected in the Managing Committee meeting held on 20th February, 2010 OFFICE BEARERS – 2010-11 CA. Shambhu Sharma H
Chairman
CA. Venkatesh Babu. T. R
Vice-Chairman
CA. Babu. K
Secretary
CA. Ravindranath T R
Treasurer
CA. Nitin M
Chairman – SICASA, Bangalore
OFFICE BEARERS – 2009-10 CA. Cotha S Srinivas
Chairman
CA. Shambhu Sharma. H
Vice-Chairman
CA. Venkatesh Babu T.R
Secretary
CA. Babu. K
Treasurer
CA.T.C. Mehta
Chairman – SICASA, Bangalore
The theme of the year 2010-11 is ‘‘TURN CHALLENGES INTO OPPORTUNITIES”– The theme is selected keeping in view that, all professionals have challenges regardless of how successful they are. The advent of plethora of new regulations or legislations whether convergence of IFRS, change over to Goods & Service Tax, complete overhauling of Companies Act, or a new direct tax legislation in the form of Direct Tax Code, or even continual changes in technology thrown challenges. But inherent in nearly all challenges are opportunities for renewal and transformation. Wherever we are in this quagmire of challenges, we being with strong foundation of education, training are in a strong position to take on the challenges upfront and turn these into opportunities that will benefit in our respective fields and economy, society as a whole. The Branch has conducted following important events during the year : Conference State Level CPE Conference National Conference for IT Industry CPE Conference
July 2010
14
Workshops Limited Liability Investor Awareness Programme International Taxation Service Tax Accounting Standards Income Tax VAT Transfer Pricing Real Estate and Construction Industry Seminars Clause by Clause discussion on Finance Bill 2009. Bank Audit National Seminar for Statutory Central Auditors of Public Sector Banks One Day Seminar on Indirect Tax Implication National Seminar on Private Equity Training Programme for Peer Reviewers Seminar on Direct Tax Code During the year some of the important dignitaries who visited the branch and visited for various programmes organized by the branch.
CA.Uttam Prakash Agarwal, President ICAI-2009-10. CA. Balakrishnan, CFO Infosys Ltd Sri V. C. Dave, ROC, Karnataka Sri.D.P.Nagendra Kumar, Commissioner Service Tax Sri. R. Sekar, Commissioner of Cental Excise & Service Tax, Pune. Sri Arvind Modi, Hon’ble Revenue Secretary CA. T.V. Mohandas Pai, Director Infosys CA. Suresh Senapathy, CFO, Wipro Limited CA.Amarjit Chopra – President ICAI – 2010-11. CA.G.Ramaswamy – Vice President ICAI Sri B. N. Harish, ROC Karnataka Sri Mathoor Krishnamurthy, Karnataka Rajyothsava Awardee. Sri S Gopalakrishna, CEO & MD, Infosys Technologies Ltd. Dr. Prabhudev, Vice–Chancellor, Bangalore University.
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES The Management Development Programmes of the branch is providing quality training to various Corporate & Government organization in the field of Finance and Accounting. It has established its own brand image now. The basic course of the MDP viz., Course in Finance for non finance executives (FNFE) and advanced Course in
Corporate Accounting, Finance and Business Laws (CAFBL) Weekend workshop on International Taxation were conducted during the year and were well attended by executives from various leading corporate in the city and across the State. We have also conducted in-house training programmes for the executives of KPCL, Next Edge Software solutions and Mfar Constructions on the following topics: • • • •
Banking Working Capital Management Tax Management Accounting Standards
STUDENTS The Branch has been regularly organising and conducting coaching classes, crash courses, Course in Computer Training for the benefit of students. The Coaching classes conducted at the branch are of high quality and cost effective also in comparison with other facilities available. 11 batches of Course in General Management and Communication Skills were conducted at the branch premises. 26 batches of Integrated Professional Competence Course (Orientation Programmes) were conducted at the branch premises.
Campus Interviews – 2009 Sl. No
March – April -2009
August – September
Candidates who had opted for the centre
No. of Companies participated
Candidates who had opted for the centre
No. of Companies participated
282
10
232
10
1.
RANK HOLDERS CPT - JUNE 2009 Sl. No.
Roll No
Reg No.
Name of the Student
Marks Obtained
Rank
1
129864
WRO0318089
PRASEED PANDITH
192
1
2
128566
SRO0275985
BIJAY SHRESTHA
189
4
3
129548
SRO0246403
VENKAT RAJITH V
185
8
4
127632
SRO0238362
SIDDARTH R SUDER RAM
184
9
PCC - JUNE 2009 Sl. No.
Roll No
Reg No.
Name of the Student
Marks Obtained
Rank
1
18880
SRO0274067
MOHIT BAJAJ
463
3
2
18784
SRO0226091
GEETHA G
438
13
3
18188
SRO0224072
SREYAS GOUTHAM
423
23
4
18846
SRO0221836
PAVAN PAL SHARMA
415
30
5
18285
SRO0207066
PREETHI K S VAIDYA‘
414
31
6
18392
SRO0213269
ANKITA A OSTWAL
413
32
7
18297
SRO0224068
NAKUL JAIN
410
35
8
18485
SRO0225127
SWATHI K
406
39
9
18211
SRO0226718
MOHAMMED SHOAIB SHIRAZI
398
47
10
18404
SRO0228258
VIPUL JAIN
397
48
Roll No
Reg No.
Name of the Student
Marks Obtained
Rank
1.
19520
SRO0250193
SHASHANK VISHWANATH
410
21
2.
20394
SRO0228537
SUSHEEN M BOHARA
401
29
3.
19577
SRO0253082
YASHASWINI M
395
35
4.
20396
SRO0232673
PRIYANKA J
394
36
5.
19633
SRO0252407
POOJA B MEHTA
392
38
6.
20500
SRO0243840
VENKATRAMAN R BHAT
385
45
PCC - NOVEMBER 2009 Sl. No.
15
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
IPCC - NOVEMBER 2009 Sl. No.
Roll No
Reg No.
Name of the Student
Marks Obtained
Rank
1.
27950
SRO0249254
AKSHIKA HARIKRISHNAN
465
23
2.
28075
SRO0251869
HARESH KUMAR J
447
38
3.
27979
SRO0224094
SRINIDHI E S
441
44
4.
28310
SRO0268164
SUMANA M RAO
439
46
5.
28031
SRO0242837
SALVA RAHUL DEVCHANDBHAI
436
49
Marks Obtained
Rank
CA FINAL - JUNE 2009 (OLD SYLLABUS) Sl. No.
Roll No
Reg No.
Name of the Student
1
11157
SRO0197140
USHA S C
500
36
2
12322
SRO0138657
RAMYA S NAYAK
496
40
3
12451
SRO0141301
ADITHYA SUBRAMANIAN
490
46
Marks Obtained
Rank
CA FINAL – NOVEMBER 2009 (OLD SYLLABUS) Sl. No.
Roll No
Reg No.
Name of the Student
1.
12264
SRO0205719
SHRUTHI B N
518
10
2.
11970
SRO0215868
AJITH K G
505
19
3.
13032
SRO0139202
NIKHIL BHARTH DEORA
504
20
4.
12022
SRO0215688
RAMA RAJU N
476
46
MEMBERSHIP
President and Office bearers of KSCAA.
As on 31.03.2010 the membership of the Bangalore Branch, which includes the members of Hosur and Tumkur is 8196.
Faculty of Coaching Classes and Management Development Programmes
BRANCH ACHIVEMENT Bangalore Branch has been adjudged as the Best Branch of SIRC during the year 2009. MANAGING COMMITTEE MEETINGS During the period from 1st April 2009 to 31st March 2010, 12 (Twelve) Meetings were held (Including 3 emergency meeting) ACCOUNTS The audited financial statement of the branch has been published in this issue of the news letter. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Statutory Auditors M/s. N .N. Yuvaraj and Associates., Chartered Accountants and Internal Auditors M/s. Patel Mohan Ramesh & Co., Chartered Accountants. Advertisers of News Letters and Sponsors of Programmes / activities Our bankers Canara Bank, Syndicate Bank and Corporation Bank. Our printers M/s. Jwalamukhi Printers & Sreeman Printers. Our Photographer Sri. M. S. Nagaraj Officers and Staff for their sincere and dedicated efforts in the overall administration of the Branch affairs Every member and student of the branch for their unstinted support in the various activities of the branch directly or indirectly.
The Managing Committee wishes to place on record deep appreciation for the support and services rendered by various persons, organisations and institutions.
For and on behalf of the Managing Committee
President, Vice President, Past Presidents, Central & Regional Council members of ICAI.
Sd/(CA. K. BABU) SECRETARY
Past Chairmen of the Bangalore Branch. Course Directors, Speakers, Co-ordinators of the various programmes
July 2010
16
Place: Bangalore Date: 26.6.2010
AUDITORS’ REPORT 1.
We have audited the attached Balance sheet of Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI., as at 31st March 2010 and the Income and Expenditure account for the year ended on that date, annexed thereto. These financial statements are the responsibility of the management and its managing committee. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
2.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards in India. These standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with an identified financial reporting framework and are free of material misstatements. An audit includes, examining on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management as well as evaluating the overall financial statements. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
3.
Further to our comments in the notes to accounts, we report that: a)
We have obtained all the information and explanations, which to the best of our knowledge and belief were necessary for the purpose of our audit.
b)
In Our opinion, proper books of account have been kept by the branch so far as it appears from our examination of the books.
c)
The Balance Sheet and the Income and Expenditure Account dealt with by this report are in agreement with the books of account.
d)
In our opinion and to the best of our information and according to the explanations given to us, the financial statements give a true and fair view in conformity with the accounting principles generally accepted in India and/or the directions received by the branch from the Central Council. i)
In the case of Balance Sheet, of the state of affairs of the Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI as at 31st March 2010 and
ii)
In the case of Income and Expenditure Account, of the excess of income over expenditure for the year ended on that date. For N.N. YUVARAJ & ASSOCIATES., Chartered Accountants ICAI FRN 005137 S
Place : Bangalore Date : 02.06.2010
Sd/(U. D. Prithvi raj) Partner M.No. 214307
17
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010 PARTICULARS LIABILITIES / SOURCE OF FUNDS GENERAL RESERVE OPENING BALANCE ADD: SURPLUS GENERAL RESERVE BALANCE TRANSFER FROM EARMARKED FUNDS TRANSFER TO EARMARKED FUNDS TOTAL GENERAL RESERVE EARMARKED AND OTHER FUNDS OPENING BALANCE ADDITIONS INTEREST INCOME LESS EXPENSES/ADJUSTMENT TOTAL EARMARKED FUNDS CURRENT LIABILITIES FEES RECEIVED IN ADVANCE CREDITORS FOR EXPENSES OTHER LIABILITIES MUNICIPAL TAX SUB TOTAL OF CURRENT LIABILITIES INTER UNIT BALANCES: CAPITAL GRANT RECEIVED ICAI CURRENT ACCOUNT ICAI PUBLICATION PAYABLE SUB-TOTAL OF INTERUNIT BALANCES TOTAL ASSETS/APPLICATION OF FUNDS FIXED ASSETS-NET BLOCK EARMARKED INVESTMENTS OTHER INVESTMENTS CURRENT ASSETS: STOCK OTHER RECEIVABLES ADVANCES & PREPAYMENTS CASH & BANK BALANCES INTER UNIT BALANCES: CENTRAL COUNCIL CURRENT ACCOUNT PUBLICATION STOCK TRANSFER ACCOUNT TOTAL DR. OF INTER UNIT BALANCES
SCHEDULE
13,233,906 489,604 13,723,510 2,542,655 16,266,165
1
18,045,101 9,666,000 983,239 2,129,589 26,564,751
15,012,187 4,500,000 1,075,569 2,542,655 18,045,101
2 3 4
1,884,647 1,364,209 554,897 3,803,753
711,700 1,455,934 812,515 2,769,177 5,749,326
6,005,327 99,808 1,525,301 7,630,436
5,616,237 99,808 1,262,201 6,978,246
58,804,656
47,038,838
7 8 9
10,854,765 26,564,751 14,885,326
10,888,154 13,545,101 15,366,892
10 11 12 13
5,825 329,924 815,218 1,595,540
6,545 118,911 541,607 3,016,665
14 15
2,527,492 1,225,815 3,753,307
2,292,748 1,262,215 3,554,963
58,804,656
47,038,838
5 6
22
for Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI Sd/Sd/Sd/(CA. Shambhu Sharma H.) (CA. Babu K.) (CA. Ravindranath S.N.) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY TREASURER Place : BANGALORE Date : 02.06.2010 July 2010
18
31-03-2009 Rs.
16,266,165 4,577,412 20,843,577 2,116,139 (2,154,000) 20,805,716
TOTAL Notes to accounts form integral part of these financial statements
31-03-2010 Rs.
As per our Report of even date for N.N.Yuvaraj & Associates Chartered Accountants Sd/(CA. Prithvi raj U.D.) PARTNER
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31.03.2010 PARTICULARS
SCHEDULE
INCOME CONFERENCE GRANT INTER COLLEGE DEBATE PROGRAMME GRANT IT COURSE GRANT ELOCUTION AND QUIZ CONTESTS GRANT MEMBERSHIP FEE GRANT AUDIT FEES GRANT SUB-TOTAL NEWS LETTER INCOME SEMINAR INCOME GMCS COURSE INCOME IPCC ORIENTATION INCOME INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS OTHER INCOME INCOME FROM COACHING CLASSES COMMISSION ON SALE OF PUBLICATIONS INCOME FROM ITT COURSE FEE PRIOR PERIOD ADJUSTMENTS TOTAL EXPENDITURE SALARY & STAFF EXPENSES PRINTING , STATIONERY & PHOTOCOPYING NEWSLETTER (RCS& BRS) POSTAGE , TELEPHONE AND COURIER RENT, ELECTRICITY AND WATER REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE TRAVEL - MEMBERS CONVEYANCE AND TRAVEL - STAFF MAGAZINE & PERIODICALS LAPTOP HIRING CHARGES INTERNAL AUDIT FEES STATUTORY AUDIT FEES PROFESSIONAL & CONSULTANCY FEES LEGAL FEES SEMINAR EXPENSES GMCS COURSE EXPENSES IPCC ORIENTATION EXPENSES OTHER EXPENSES EXPENDITURE ON ITT COURSE FEE EXPENSES TOWARDS COACHING CLASSES PRIOR PERIOD ADJUSTMENTS
16 17
18
19
20
21
SUB - TOTAL DEPRECIATION TOTAL SURPLUS Appropriations MAINTENANCE FUND BUILDING MAINTENANCE FUND CA STUDENT EDUCATION FUND ITT RESERVE FUND FIXED ASSET ACQUISITION FUND BALANCE TRANSFERRED TO GENERAL RESERVE Notes to accounts form integral part of these financial statements
Sd/(CA. Shambhu Sharma H.) CHAIRMAN Place : BANGALORE Date : 02.06.2010
22
for Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI Sd/Sd/(CA. Babu K.) (CA. Ravindranath S.N.) SECRETARY TREASURER
31-03-2010 Rs.
31-03-2009 Rs.
770,600 99,270
5,000 45,190 4,000 11,001 716,000 79,416
869,870 173,000 10,931,744 2,724,500 5,077,500 1,977,722 784,254 3,178,953 433,529 9,248,000 582,989
860,607 282,000 13,485,308 2,857,500 1,270,395 172,406 2,371,465 453,443 5,780,000 112,677
35,982,061
27,645,801
1,717,131 463,639 939,542 81,505 505,322 1,609,364 23,614 39,354 10,851 27,234 79,416 19,854 163,787 30,000 8,463,456 1,787,512 2,217,101 414,813 1,255,725 1,622,459 75,344
1,243,271 137,853 1,130,817 182,840 450,516 835,481 34,426 43,480 18,163 27,788 59,562 19,854 69,500 10,000 9,318,595 2,031,815 299,304 863,941 1,524,743 2,854,726
21,547,022 2,345,627 23,892,649 12,089,412
21,156,675 1,499,522 22,656,197 4,989,604
1,000,000 1,500,000 200,000 2,312,000 2,500,000
500,000 1,500,000 2,500,000
4,577,412
489,604
As per our Report of even date for N.N.Yuvaraj & Associates Chartered Accountants Sd/(CA. Prithvi raj U.D.) PARTNER
19
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA SCHEDULES FORMING PART OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010 SCHEDULE - 1 : EARMARKED AND OTHER FUNDS PARTICULARS
AS AT ADDITIONS INCOME DEDUCTIONS 01.04.2009 Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
AS AT 31-03-2010
AS AT 31-03-2009
Rs.
Rs.
ENDOWMENT FUNDS VISWESHWARAIAH PRIZE FUND
90,427
-
5,123
3,500
92,050
90,427
GURUPRASAD PRIZE FUND
59,294
-
3,200
2,350
60,144
59,294
BHANUMURTHY PRIZE FUND
16,583
-
1,304
850
17,037
16,583
SEETHARAMAIAH PRIZE FUND
118,451
-
9,449
6,750
121,150
118,451
TOTAL (A)
284,755
-
19,076
13,450
290,381
284,755
STUDY CIRCLE SERIES FUND
502,648
-
25,670
-
528,318
502,648
CA STUDENT EDUCATION FUND
561,840
200,000
34,209
120,000
676,049
561,840
7,420,669
1,500,000
423,678
-
9,344,347
7,420,669
750,026
-
60,930
17,112
793,844
750,026
FIXED ASSET ACQUISITION FUND
6,020,084
2,500,000
253,758
1,979,027
6,794,815
6,020,084
MAINTENANCE FUND
2,505,079
1,000,000
96,599
-
3,601,678
2,505,079
-
4,466,000
69,319
-
4,535,319
-
TOTAL (B)
17,760,346
9,666,000
964,164
2,116,139
26,274,370
17,760,346
GRAND TOTAL (A) + (B)
18,045,101
9,666,000
983,240
2,129,589
26,564,751
18,045,101
DESIGNATED FUNDS
BUILDING MAINTENANCE FUND LIBRARY CORPUS FUND
ITT RESERVE FUND CURRENT YEAR 23,12,000 (INCOME & EXPENDITURE) EARLIER YEAR 21,54,000 (GENERAL RESERVE)
July 2010
20
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA SCHEDULES FORMING PART OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010 PARTICULARS FEES RECEIVED IN ADVANCE GMCS COURSE FEES IPCC ORIENTATION ADVANCE CCAFBL TRAINING PROGRAMME CPT COACHING CLASS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TRAINING FINAL COACHING CLASS IPCC COACHING CLASS CRASH COURSE PE II/PCC TOTAL CREDITORS FOR EXPENSES STATUTORY AUDIT FEES SECURITY CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS LIABILITIES PRINTING AND STATIONERY POSTAGE, COURIER AND TELEPHONES INTERNAL AUDIT FEES PROFESSIONAL FEES RENT, ELECTRICITY AND WATER FACULTY FEES PAYABLE ITT EXPENSES SALARY FIXED ASSESTS- INTERIORS (SOUTH ITT CENTRE) FIXED ASSESTS- LCD PROJECTOR PAYABLE CATERING EXPENSES FIXED ASSESTS- ELECTRICAL FITTINGS (SOUTH ITT CENTRE) BUILDING MAINTENANCE TOTAL OTHER LIABILITIES SECURITY DEPOSIT - EX EMPLOYEE TDS PAYABLE MEDICAL REIMBURSEMENT/ RETENTION MONEY -STAFF EXCESS CREDIT FROM BANK EXAM FORM NOV’08 COLLECTION DUE FOR REMITTANCE SUNDRY LIABILITIES LEASE RENT PAYABLE SICASA BANGALORE TOTAL ICAI CURRENT ACCOUNT ICAI - GRATUITY GRANT PAYABLE TOTAL ICAI PUBLICATION PAYABLE ARTICLE REGISTRATION FORMS PUBLICATIONS REVISION TEST PAPERS STUDY MATERIALS SUGGESTED ANSWERS BOS - GMCS MATERIAL PAYABLE TOTAL
SCHEDULE
31-03-2010 Rs.
31-03-2009 Rs.
531,020 268,500 103,230 155,897 800,000 8,000 18,000 -
115,200 396,000 107,000 93,500
1,884,647
711,700
19,854 17,418 15,601 151,607 10,607 35,737 7,200 102,795 919,694 6,484 51,622 25,590
19,854 8,443 1,600 11,852 53,427 119,433 717,350 72,500 3,464 233,829 149,953 64,229 -
1,364,209
1,455,934
1,000 160,522 36,500 20,000 55,125 12,500 269,250
5,000 141,930 46,710 20,000 272,200 26,675 300,000
554,897
812,515
99,808
99,808
99,808
99,808
17,850 577,813 77,638 48,094 478,906 325,000
29,150 631,608 21,198 38,159 542,086 -
1,525,301
1,262,201
2
3
4
5
6
21
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA SCHEDULES FORMING PART OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010 SCHEDULE - 7 : FIXED ASSETS PARTICULARS
AT BRANCH PREMISES AIRCONDITIONER CANOPY COMPUTER LAB A/C COMPUTER LAB COMPUTERS FURNITURECOMPUTER LAB COMPUTER LAB UPS COMPUTERS ELECTRICAL FITTINGS FIRE ALARM SYSTEM FURNITURE FURNITURE-KITCHEN UTENSILS LAPTOP LCD PROJECTOR LIBRARY BOOKS LIFT NETWORKING OFFICE EQUIPMENTS PRINTERS INTERIOR AUDITORIUM INTERIORS SOFTWARE UPS PLASMA TV ITT SOUTH CENTER AIRCONDITIONER COMPUTER LAB COMPUTERS LCD PROJECTOR PRINTERS INTERIOR DECORATION UPS FURNITURE NETWORKING ELECTRICAL FITTINGS
July 2010
RATE OF DEP. (%)
WDV AS ON ADDITIONS DELETIONS 01.04.2009 (In Rs) (In Rs) (In Rs)
TOTAL
DEPRECIATION
(In Rs)
(In Rs)
WDV ON 31.03.2010 (In Rs)
15% 10% 10%
685,467 80,208 49,396
21,000 -
-
706,467 80,208 49,396
104,814 8,021 4,940
601,653 72,187 44,456
60%
212,940
112,230
-
325,170
191,228
133,942
10% 15% 60% 10% 10% 10%
186,725 83,902 39,744 731,919 16,452 2,822,406
52,097 214,954 11,485 55,500 337,127
72,991 -
186,725 135,999 254,698 670,413 71,952 3,159,533
18,673 13,077 34,882 72,960 4,063 302,838
168,052 122,922 219,816 597,453 67,889 2,856,695
10% 60% 60% 100% 10% 60% 15% 15% 10% 10% 60% 15% 15%
18,142 1,564 256,415 252,791 10,286 237,924 69,348 1,476,221 1,380,362 26,091 166,033 57,189
150,800 110,768 17,112 87,850 3,500 9,000 731,950 5,625 -
-
18,142 152,364 367,183 17,112 252,791 98,136 241,424 78,348 1,476,221 2,112,312 26,091 171,658 57,189
1,814 43,369 168,234 17,112 25,279 22,364 35,818 11,752 147,622 174,533 15,655 25,365 8,578
16,328 108,995 198,949 227,512 75,772 205,606 66,596 1,328,599 1,937,779 10,436 146,293 48,611
15%
120,000
-
-
120,000
18,000
102,000
60% 60% 15% 10% 15% 10% 60% 10%
1,050,000 74,977 389,250 143,375 108,309 140,718
9,500 445,000 9,731
-
1,050,000 74,977 9,500 389,250 445,000 143,375 108,309 150,449
630,000 44,986 1,378 38,925 65,104 14,338 64,985 14,920
420,000 29,991 8,122 350,325 379,896 129,037 43,324 135,529
GRAND TOTAL
10,888,154
2,385,229
72,991
13,200,392
2,345,627
10,854,765
PREVIOUS YEAR
9,608,602
2,779,074
-
12,387,676
1,499,522
10,888,154
22
BANGALORE BRANCH OF SIRC OF THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA SCHEDULES FORMING PART OF BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2010 SCHEDULE - 8 : EARMARKED AND OTHER INVESTMENTS PARTICULARS
In FDRs
INTEREST RECEIVABLE
Rs.
INTEREST NET RECEIVED INTEREST RECEIVABLE
BALANCE WITH INVESTMENT (GEN) Rs.
As At 31-03-2010
As At 31-03-2009
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
Rs.
64,035 41,770 14,925 118,451 239,181 356,030 435,257 7,241,219 684,039 3,238,270 1,676,793 3,900,000
5,123 3,200 1,304 9,449 19,076 25,670 34,209 423,678 60,930 253,758 96,599 69,319
3,200 1,304 951 5,455 11,131 14,479 54,066 16,479 124,455 42,400 -
5,123 8,498 13,621 14,539 19,730 369,612 44,451 129,303 54,199 69,319
22,892 18,374 2,112 (5,799) 37,579 157,749 221,062 1,733,516 65,354 3,427,242 1,870,686 566,000
92,050 60,144 17,037 121,150 290,381 528,318 676,049 9,344,347 793,844 6,794,815 3,601,678 4,535,319
90,427 59,294 16,583 118,451 284,755 502,648 561,840 5,920,669 750,026 3,520,084 2,005,079 -
TOTAL (B)
17,531,608
964,164
263,010
701,154
8,041,608
26,274,370
13,260,346
GRAND TOTAL (A) + (B)
17,770,789
983,240
268,465
714,775
8,079,187
26,564,751
13,545,101
VISWESHWARAIAH PRIZE FUND GURUPRASAD PRIZE FUND BHANUMURTHY PRIZE FUND SEETHARAMAIAH PRIZE FUND TOTAL (A) STUDY CIRCLE SERIES FUND CA STUDENT EDUCATION FUND BUILDING MAINTENANCE FUND LIBRARY CORPUS FUND FIXED ASSET ACQUISITION FUND MAINTENANCE FUND ITT RESERVE FUND
PARTICULARS INVESTMENTS - GENERAL FIXED DEPOSITS WITH CANARA BANK- ITT FIXED DEPOSITS WITH CANARA BANK RBI 8% BONDS
SCHEDULE
OTHER RECEIVABLES DUE FROM EX - EMPLOYEE FEES RECEIVABLE FROM MEMBERS & STUDENTS KPCL PROGRAMME RECEIVABLE FKCCI UNION BUDGET ANANLYSIS RECEIVABLES BANGALORE STOCK EXCHANGE RECEIVABLES GRANT RECEIVABLES FROM MCA TOTAL ADVANCE & PRE-PAYMENTS DEPOSITS WITH KPTCL ADVANCE - STATE LEVEL CONFERENCE DEPOSIT FOR RENT - BANGALORE SOUTH ITT CENTER ADVANCE TO STAFF PREPAID EXPENSES ADVANCE - POST OFFICE FOR NEWSLETTER POSTING TOTAL
31-03-2009 Rs.
9
LESS : AMOUNT TO BE TRANSFERRED TO EARMARKED INVESTMENTS TOTAL STOCK GIFT VOUCHERS STOCK WIRC
31-03-2010 Rs. 7,228,603 8,412,804 7,323,106 22,964,513
9,450,345 6,990,859 16,441,204
8,079,187
1,074,312
14,885,326
15,366,892
5,825
720 5,825
5,825
6,545
29,250 121,500 96,946 32,228 50,000
29,250 63,060 26,601 -
329,924
118,911
174,800 241,068 280,000 27,752 70,571 21,027
174,800 280,000 5,000 67,176 14,631
815,218
541,607
10
11
12
23
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
PARTICULARS CASH & BANK BALANCES CANARA BANK SB A/C.80172 CANARA BANK SB A/C.10825 CANARA BANK SB A/C.11215 CANARA BANK SB A/C.9499 CANARA BANK SB A/C. 80999 CANARA BANK SB A/C.9759 CASH ON HAND CHEQUE ON HAND TOTAL CENTRAL COUNCIL CURRENT ACCOUNT TDS RECEIVABLE SEMINAR GRANT RECEIVABLE MEMBERSHIP FEES GRANT RECEIVABLE SUNDAY TEST EXPENSES ICAI CURRENT ACCOUNT ICAI DECENTRALISED OFFICE, BANGALORE BOS GRANT RECEIVABLE ICAI - SALARY AUDIT FEES GRANT RECEIVABLE LIBRARY GRANT MEDICAL GRANT RECEIVABLE FIRST ISA MEET RECEIVABLE ISA PT EXPENSES RECEIVABLE CPT ONLINE EXAM RECEIVABLE GST WAY FORWARD RECEIVABLE PROJECT PARIVARTHAN PROGRAMME EXAM EXPENSES RECEIVABLE TOTAL ICAI PUBLICATION STOCK ACCOUNT ARTICLED REGISTRATION FORMS PUBLICATIONS REVISION TEST PAPERS STUDY MATERIALS SUGGESTED ANSWERS GMCS BOOK STOCK TOTAL INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS INTEREST ON FIXED DEPOSITS / RBI BONDS INTEREST ON SB ACCOUNTS TOTAL OTHER INCOME COIN BOOTH COLLECTION COMMISSION RECEIVED - EXAM FORMS MISCELLANEOUS INCOME SALE OF BRANCH PUBLICATIONS TOTAL PRIOR PERIOD ADJUSTMENTS - INCOME FD INTEREST FROM SYNDICATE BANK (05-06 FD MATURED) COACHING CLASS/SEMINAR ( HONARARIUM REVERSED) ACCRUED INTEREST ON FDR CANARA BANK EXAM FORM COLLECTION INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3RD BATCH DIAMOND JUBLEE MEGA CONFERENCE ITT INCOME 68TH BATCH ACCOUNTING STANDARD BUILDING MAINTENANCE MUNICIPAL TAX EXCESS PROVISION REVERSED DUBAI STUDY TOUR INTERNAL AUDIT FEES - EXCESS PROVISION REVERSED TOTAL
July 2010
24
SCHEDULE
31-03-2010 Rs.
31-03-2009 Rs.
13 26,813 218,190 506,040 781,409 45,950 1,089 16,050
24,818 434,202 2,290 2,430,987 16,767 10,751 96,850
1,595,540
3,016,665
754,745 15,000 61,025 28,421 22,105 1,019,486 42,000 93,255 237,506 49,619 7,285 16,665 63,486 42,671 49,604 9,342 15,277
612,756 15,000 61,025 28,421 22,105 1,093,446 42,000 222,855 138,236 49,619 7,285 -
2,527,492
2,292,748
19,300 575,420 79,330 47,980 454,285 49,500
29,100 628,975 21,890 40,785 517,465 24,000
1,225,815
1,262,215
1,863,489 114,234
1,170,806 99,589
1,977,722
1,270,395
642,038 142,216 -
781 163,605 7,220 800
784,254
172,406
14,577 400 787 2,300 4,000 1,000 5,624 554,301 -
17,901 16,166 4,699 50,000 23,911
582,989
112,677
14
15
16
17
18
PARTICULARS SALARY & STAFF EXPENSES SALARY TO STAFF (INCLUSIVE OF INCENTIVE AND OVER TIME) STAFF WELFARE EXPENSES MEDICAL EXPENSES UNIFORM EXPENSES GRATUITY EXPENSES TOTAL OTHER EXPENSES GENERAL EXPENSES SECURITY CHARGES BANK CHARGES CA STUDENT SCHOLARSHIP TOTAL PRIOR PERIOD ADJUSTMENTS - EXPENSES MUNICIPAL TAX PAYMENT SEMINAR EXPENSES 39TH REGIONAL CONFERENCE SIRC CONFERENCE EXPENSES RECEIVABLES WORKSHOP ON BASICS OF M S EXCEL IPCC COACHING CLASS JUNE-09 CPT COACHING CLASS JUNE’09
SCHEDULE
31-03-2010 Rs.
31-03-2009 Rs.
19 1,505,638 151,381 25,000 35,112 -
1,109,160 52,361 34,500 47,250
1,717,131
1,243,271
214,331 73,694 6,788 120,000
215,240 67,839 16,225 -
414,813
299,304
1,587 900 34,878 37,979
2,847,768 750 6,208 -
75,344
2,854,726
20
21
TOTAL
SCHEDULE-22 SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND NOTES FORMING PART OF ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2010. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES a. Accounting policy: The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the format provided by the ICAI, New Delhi, as per the “Accounting Manual for Branches of Regional council” b. Revenue Recognition: Revenue is recognized on accrual basis, as per the “Accounting Manual for Branches of Regional council” c. Inventories: i) Branch publications are accounted at cost. ii) Stock of publication held on behalf of ICAI is stated at selling price. d. Fixed Assets & Depreciation: Fixed assets are stated at written down value after providing depreciation. Depreciation is provided adopting rates provided in “ Accounting Manual for Branches of Regional council” e. Investments: Investments are stated at cost f. Deferred Tax Asset/Liability Is not applicable at branch level. NOTES FORMING PART OF ACCOUNTS: 1. Balances representing creditors for expenses, other liabilities & central council current accounts are subject to reconciliation & receipt of confirmations from parties. 2. During the year the Branch has not made provision for Gratuity as the same is dealt at Head office level. 3. The Branch has transferred to ITT Reserve Fund a sum of Rs.44,66,000/= in accordance with guidelines for establishing ITT Centre at the Branches of the Institute of the Chartered Accountants of India. 4. Previous year’s figures & figures in financial statements have been rounded off to the nearest rupee and have been regrouped/ rearranged wherever necessary to make them comparable and meaningful.
for Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI Sd/Sd/Sd/(CA. Shambhu Sharma H.) (CA. Babu K.) (CA. Ravindranath S.N.) CHAIRMAN SECRETARY TREASURER Place : BANGALORE Date : 02.06.2010
As per our Report of even date for N.N.Yuvaraj & Associates Chartered Accountants Sd/(CA. Prithvi raj U.D.) PARTNER
25
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Announcement for Members
AN APPEAL TO THE MEMBERS
ISA PT Classes We are proposing to hold ISA PT Classes in the month of August 2010 at Bangalore (subject registration of 30 candidates). Interested Members may contact Bangalore office @
[email protected] or call 080 - 30563541 / 542 for further details.
Request the Members to pass on this information to their clients. Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI will be launching the XIV Batch of the Course on Finance for Non Finance Executives (FNFE) by last week of July 2010 under the aegis of Management Development Programmes.
Certificate Course on Valuation We are proposing to hold Certificate Course on Valuation at Bangalore (subject registration of 30 candidates). Interested Members may contact Bangalore office @
[email protected] or call 30563541 / 542 for further details. Certificate Course on International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)
The said course is a weekend course conducted only on Saturdays between 3.00pm and 7.00pm. The course is targeted at the executives those who are not having any Commerce / Accounts background.
We are pleased to announce that 5th Batch at Bangalore Centre of Certificate Course on IFRS is scheduled to take place in the last week of July 2010 subject to the minimum registration of 50 candidates. The other details are mentioned below:
Fee: Rs. 12,000/-
Days of Class Room Four Weekends (Saturdays and Sundays)
For further details contact Mrs. Rema Sujit or Mrs. Anuradha at Bangalore Branch on 30563500/512/511 email:
[email protected]
Duration of the course100 Hours consisting of a) 60 Hours of E-Learning b) 40 Hours of Class Room Teaching CPE Hours The CPE credit of 90 Hours (30 Structured + 60 Unstructured) Venue of the Course Would intimated shortly Fee Structure ICAI Member - Rs. 30,000/Non Members – Rs. 50,000/-
Required - Chartered Accountants and Semi qualified Chartered Accountants
The Demand draft may be drawn in favour of “The Secretary, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India”, payable at New Delhi.
We are a consulting organization focused on building a knowledge eco-system for an inclusive growth for our team and clients. Our knowledge-based foundation and delivery propositions anchor finance and tax functions leaving our clients to focus on their business and core competencies. Our value proposition lies in our commitment to innovation, trust and speed. Please visit our website at www.accretiveglobal.com to know more about us.
CA. Shambhu Sharma H. Chairman, Bangalore Branch of SIRC of ICAI
[email protected] Candidates may kindly send the Registration Form duly filled in all respect (available at the website of the Institute at: http://www.icai.org/addupdate/regform.php) duly filled in along with the fee to:
Interested candidates are requested to email their detailed profiles to
[email protected].
The Nodal Officer, Certificate Course on IFRS, Technical Directorate, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, ICAI Bhawan, Indraprastha Marg, PB No. 7100, New Delhi - 110 002, Email:
[email protected]
+ 91 80 4151 6187 | www.accretiveglobal.com |
26
Advt.
We are looking out for qualified and semi-qualified chartered accountants for our controllership and internal audit vertical. Chosen candidates would be assured of a good career progression along with attractive remuneration package.
Accretive Business Consulting Private Limited
July 2010
Course Coordinator for Bangalore Centre: CA. K. Raghu, Central Council Member, ICAI Email:
[email protected],
[email protected]
27
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
July 2010
28
29
July 2010
Bangalore Branch of SIRC of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
July 2010
30
