Category: Co-operative Societies

In Maharashtra, Co-op Societies Audit can be done by 31.12.2020 & AGM can be held by 31.3.2021

yazdi4 Comments

Annual General Body Can Be Held on or before before 31 03 2021 due to Corona. ALSO AUDIT FOR THE YEAR ENDEd 31 03 2020 TO BE DONE BY 31 12 2020.

 

जनसंपर्क कक्ष (मुख्यमंत्री सचिवालय)

मंत्रिमंडळ बैठक : दि. 23 जुलै 2020
एकूण निर्णय-4

सहकार विभाग

सहकारी संस्था अधिनियमात सुधारणा करण्यास मान्यता
लेखा परिक्षण, वार्षिक सर्वसाधारण सभेचा कालावधी वाढविण्याबाबत

महाराष्ट्र सहकारी संस्था अधिनियम 1960 मधील विविध कलमात सुधारणा करण्याचा निर्णय आज झालेल्या मंत्रिमंडळ बैठकीत घेण्यात आला. यानुसार कोरोनाच्या पार्श्वभूमीवर वार्षिक सर्वसाधारण सभेच्या कालावधीस आणि लेखा परिक्षणास मुदतवाढ देण्याची सुधारणा करण्यात येईल.

महाराष्ट्र सहकारी संस्था अधिनियम 1960 मधील कलम 27 मधील तरतुदीनुसार संस्थेच्या क्रियाशील सभासदांनाच संस्थेच्या निवडणूकीमध्ये मतदान करता येते. संस्थेचा क्रियाशील सभासद होण्यासाठी, काही किमान सेवा घेणे व 5 वर्षातून किमान एकदा वार्षिक सर्वसाधारण सभेस उपस्थित राहणे अपेक्षित आहे. मात्र कोरोना महामारीच्या प्रकोपामुळे कलम 75 मधील तरतूदीनुसार राज्यातील सहकारी संस्थांच्या वार्षिक सर्वसाधारण सभा दि. 30.09.2020 पर्यत घेणे शक्य नसल्याने संस्थांमधील सभासद अक्रियाशील होवून भविष्यात संस्थेच्या होणाऱ्या निवडणूकीत ते मतदार यादीतून वगळले जावून, मतदानापासून वंचित राहू शकतात. हे टाळण्यासाठी कलम 27 मध्ये सुधारणा करण्यास व सर्वसाधारण सभा घेण्याचा कालावधी वाढविण्यासाठी कलम 75 मध्ये अशी सभा घेण्यासाठी दिनांक 31.03.2021 पर्यंत मुदतवाढ देण्याबाबत सुधारणा करण्यास मान्यता देण्यात आली आहे.

तसेच कलम 81 मधील तरतुदीनुसार प्रत्येक संस्थेला वित्तीय वर्ष समाप्त झाल्यापासून 4 महिन्यांच्या कालावधीत आपले लेखापरीक्षण करून घेणे आवश्यक आहे. मात्र, सध्याच्या कोरोनाच्या साथीमुळे लेखापरिक्षण अहवाल दिनांक 31.07.2020 पूर्वी सादर करणे शक्य नसल्याने कलम 81 चे पोट-कलम 1 मध्ये लेखापरिक्षण अहवाल सादर करण्याच्या कालावधीत दिनांक 31.12.2020 पर्यंत मुदतवाढ करण्यासाठी उक्त कलमात सुधारणा करण्यास मान्यत देण्यात आली आहे.
कोव्हिड-19 या साथ रोगामुळे 250 पेक्षा कमी सदस्य संख्या असलेल्या सहकारी गृहनिर्माण संस्थांच्या निवडणुका पुढे ढकलण्यात आल्या आहेत. त्यामुळे ज्या गृह निर्माण संस्थांची पाच वर्षाची मुदत संपली असेल, अशा संस्थांवरील समिती सदस्य नवीन समिती अस्तित्वात येईपर्यंत नियमितपणे सदस्य म्हणून कायम राहाण्यासाठी कलम 154-ब चे पोट-कलम 19(3 मध्ये )तरतुद करण्यास मान्यता देण्यात आली.

 

Shared by Adv. VINOD SAMPAT

Forfeiture of Booking Amount is not allowed

yazdiLeave a comment

MahaRera Appellate Tribunal order dt 29 June 2020 holding that forfeiture of booking amount is bad as the customers are forced to sign on one sided clauses. Relying on SC judgement in Pioneer Land and Infrastructure Vs. Govindan Raghavan in Civil Appeal No.72238 of 2O78 decided on 2nd April 2019 by Supreme Court, directions to refund the booking amount of Rs.6.95 lacs towards 5 % flat value

This judgement now mandates that one sided clauses used to forfeit booking amounts will not be upheld by courts… Presumption of unfair negotiation and one sided clauses…

Another pro consumer and testing time for developers….

Click Here for the judgement -21466 OF 2019 

The ‘landmark’ Calcutta Club verdict changes GST norms for clubs

yazdiLeave a comment

The Supreme Court has said that service tax need not be charged by clubs for services to its members. The same should hold true for the GST, which replaced service tax

Under tax laws, every now and then, a decision is delivered which gets the “landmark” prefix. Names such as BC Srinivasa Shetty, Bacha F Guzdar and the Azadi Bachao Andolan became familiar because of landmark judgments. The features of landmark decisions are that they resolve an issue in a critical area of the law which has been litigated for ages, are decisive judgments and are invariably given by the Supreme Court.

Recently, the Supreme Court pronounced a landmark judgment under service tax laws in the Calcutta Club case. The decision was that clubs are not entitled to charge, collect and pay service tax on any services made to members. The rationale for the decision was that if there are no members, there is no club and vice-versa. A few years earlier, the Jharkhand High Court gave a similar ruling in a case involving the Ranchi Club.

The Supreme Court followed its earlier decision on the same topic in the case of CTO versus Young Men’s Indian Association, (1970) 1 SCC 462. The necessity for the Supreme Court to rule on this matter arose because of the insertion of Clause (e) in Article 366 (29-A) in the Constitution of India through the 46th Amendment. This clause stated that tax on purchase or sale of goods includes a tax on the supply of goods by any unincorporated association or body of persons to a member for cash, deferred payment or another valuable consideration.

The Supreme Court needed to decide whether the doctrine of mutuality has been done away with by Article 366 (29-A) (e), and whether the ratio of Young Men’s Indian Association would continue to operate even after the 46th Amendment.

Click Here for more

INCOME TAX ON CELL TOWER RENT WHICH IS ILLEGAL UNDER BYE LAW 169

yazdi1 Comment
Many cooperative societies have rented a portion of their respective terrace for cell tower installation.  In the income tax such earning should be shown as income from house and not from other source of income.  in income return one should show the cell tower space rent as “income from house property” and can get 30% set off in computation of taxable income.  In case cell tower rent is shown as “Income from other sources” or “income from business” the 30% set off will not be allowed.  Since terrace is a portion of “house”, such income from House property is justified.
However, Bye Law 169 prohibits renting of common areas, therefore, such earning are illegal earning.  Therefore, an offence.
Audit of many societies are in progress.  Take proper care for computation of taxable income.
Dr P K Banerjee  drpkbanerjee@hotmail.com
982 097 4449 / 8850 771 660