CA Ravi Sisodia 's Expert Profile

C.A. LINESH PATIL says :
i have several query regarding excise:- 1).who is liable to pay excise duty if goods is manufactured by job worker.in the following cases:- a)when there is principal to principal relationship AND b)when there is principal to agent relationship. 2)what is meant by principal to principal & principal to agent relationship. 3)when packing,repacking, labeling,& relabeling amounts to deemed manufacture please reply my queries as soon as possible and dont copy paste section wordings. i want explanation in simple and own word. Thanks in advance

sanjay says : CENVAT CREDIT TAKEN ARE NOT
SIR, we are manufacturing a zarda product,we have a cenvat credit taken are not.but NTF. NO. 11/2010-CE (NT), DT. 27/02/2010, 16. Cenvat credit admissible on chewing tobacco in bulk packs. – (1) A manufacturer of chewing tobacco notified under section 3A of the Act shall be allowed to take credit (hereinafter referred to as the CENVAT credit)but shall i have take a cenvat credit.

CS Sourabh says : unnecessary tension
sir i m a great fan of u literally i m saying...sir i hav a little tension which i want to tell you..i just appeared for pcc(3rd attempt having a exemption in accounts) n cs executive(1st group-1st attempt..as every 1 in my familiy r engineer..as i m not clearing pcc...they wan me to prepere for bank exams also..but i only want to study ca n cs as i already made my mindset that this is my aim..bank exams required different preparation as u know...for last 2 attewmpts i m falling by aggregate.i m totally dedicated towards my profession..so sir plz giv me ur view....

kasturi says : company law
Sir, Im in chaos on scedule xiii of the companies act.our company(closely held public company) has appointed managing director for 5 years in 2005 with a remuneration of Rs.40000/-p.m by members by special resolution without the approval of remuneration committee as most of the independent director were resigned and there was nno remuneration committee.However there is no such law which state that appointment must be approved by remuneration committee except schedule xiii. During 2008-09 there was inadequate profit and salary paid was within the limit i.t Rs.400000/- to managing directors. Now auditors have laid down their remarks that the salary paid was excess of schedule xiii of the companies act.When we sought clarification and raised question that salray is within limit of schedule xiii.But their reply is that we have not followed conditions laid down in schedule xiii as remuneration committee not recommended appointment of managing diectors in 2005 and company has made default in payment of debts in the year 2008-09.Hence salary paid is in excess of schedule xiiI it is auditors remarks. Now the question is whether fixation of remuneration at the time of appointment of managing director should be only for the period of three years? what if managing directors have been appointed by shareholders in 2007 when there is a profit and in the year 2010 there is inadquacy of profit whether salary of rs.400000/- paid to shareholders is deemed to be in excess of limits laid down in schedule xiii only by the reason that remuneration committee has not recommended the appointment of MD in 2007 only shareholders have appointed the MDS? company will appoint as usual with the approval of shareholders when there is a profit and how far it is justice that remuneration committee has not recommended the apointment of MDS hence salary is in excess of schedule xiii enenthough it is in limit? Does it mean that it is compulsory to appoint MD with the recommendation of remuneration comm>ittee even in casse of profit? Pls help in this matter urgently