Discuss and download CA Final Exam Nov here !!

reallu unable to know how i got my paper? dont know whether i vl pass or not

well....actually i think question 2 took most of the time and after that  much time wasnt left to solve other portion properly...some points seem to be easy at the first look but while solving.....Confusion hi confusion tha :P

PS: Jo paper dete hain unke liye tough, Jo next attempts denge unke liye nighmares dene wala and JO PASS HO GAYE...... huh unke Liye "Oh Kitna easy thaaaaa Ye icai to CA Final ka level gira raha hai ' :P

Originally posted by : Debashree Mishra
	well....actually i think question 2 took most of the time and after that  much time wasnt left to solve other portion properly...some points seem to be easy at the first look but while solving.....Confusion hi confusion tha :P PS: Jo paper dete hain unke liye tough, Jo next attempts denge unke liye nighmares dene wala and JO PASS HO GAYE...... huh unke Liye "Oh Kitna easy thaaaaa Ye icai to CA Final ka level gira raha hai ' :P

very true

i felt the paper was average just like last time....not too easy neither too tough.......it was good that 2 case law questions came.....and interest questions also were asked.....i did one blunder where i wrote answer to question 6(d) as no but then i crossed it and wrote yes...but then i came home and found out that my earlier answer was the correct one....i lost 3 marks i really hope the 3 marks dont make me fail...

Originally posted by : ANIRBAN DAS
	i felt the paper was average just like last time....not too easy neither too tough.......it was good that 2 case law questions came.....and interest questions also were asked.....i did one blunder where i wrote answer to question 6(d) as no but then i crossed it and wrote yes...but then i came home and found out that my earlier answer was the correct one....i lost 3 marks i really hope the 3 marks dont make me fail...

hehe yea that happens. First choice is generally correct as per my own experience hehe  :) Have faith in God :)

50-50 chances

While reading one of the caselaw just before the exam about "treating heart as a plant"..i laughed so hard( lawyer prashant bhushan case)

IT CAME in the question paper...Got shocked...laughed again..attempted it

@ Ramakrishnan..... Its ' Shanti Bhushan case not Prasanth Bhushan'

any difficult question except no. 2??

ok ok its shanti bhushan..guys jeril and tarun

how did your paper go

paper was not easy , All question require presence of mind. I have lost 25 marks due to wrong choice select.

Download solution

at

/forum/ca-final-nov-2012-solution-download-227681.asp#.UKahouTqk8o

Shanti Bhushan v. CIT (2011) 336 ITR 26 (Delhi)

Fact : The assessee was a lawyer by profession. He contended that the heart should be treated as plant as it is used for the purpose of his professional work and expenditure on heart surgery should be allowed as business expenditure either u/s 31 as current repairs to plant or u/s 37 as an expense incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of profession.

Decision :  The High Court held that:-

1. The expenditure on heart surgery is not allowable as repairs to plant u/s 31 because;

• To allow the heart surgery expenditure as repair expenses to plant, the heart should have been shown as an asset in PY and in earlier years.
• The assessee would face difficulty in arriving at the cost of acquisition of such an asset for showing in his books of account.
• Under sec 43(3), Plant has inclusive definition but the plant must have been used as a business tool which is not true in case of heart. Therefore, the heart cannot be said to be plant for the business or profession of the assessee.

2. The claim for allowing the said expenditure u/s 37 is also not tenable because;

As per Sec 37, the said expenditure must be incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of assessee’s profession. Healthy heart will increase the efficiency of human being IN EVERY FIELD including professional work. Therefore, there is NO DIRECT NEXUS between said expenditure and his efficiency in the professional field.

CIT (TDS) v. ITC Ltd. (2011) 338 ITR 598 (Del.)

The assessee company was engaged in the business of owning, operating and managing Hotels.

• The employer company allowed the employees to receive TIPS from Customers. When the tips were received by the employees directly in cash, the employer hardly had any role and not even  know the amounts of tips collected by employees. Hence, the employer has no responsibility under Sec192.

• However, If the employer himself collected tips (e.g. By way of certain percentage of bill amount, or an specified amount, or indicated on bill as tip by the customer etc.), then those were also disbursed by the employer to the employees. On the receipt of such money from the customers, the obligation arises on employer to pay it to the employee & similarly, a right accrues to the employee to claim the tips. This is by virtue of the employer-employee relationship. Hence, the tips, in the hands of employee, would constitute income within Sec. 2(24) and taxable u/s 15. Employer is liable to deduct tax at source from such payment u/s 192.

• In this case, the assessee company had not made TDS on tips under a bonafide belief that tax was not deductible and the Revenue has accepted the practice of the assessee in past year’s assessment. There is no dishonest intention of the assessee and hence, could not be liable for penalty u/s201. However, payment of interest u/s 201(1A) is mandatory because payment of interest under that provision is not penal in nature.