DT Paper

Page no : 10

Sonakshi (executive) (3068 Points)
Replied 17 May 2011

CA final DT paper May 2011 download from here

Attached File : 206306 717472 scan0003.zip downloaded: 242 times

Upgrade to CAclubindia Pro. Subscribe Now!

bhuvan_Agarwal (C.A.) (105 Points)
Replied 17 May 2011

Regardng Mepco industries 2009 main thing was hld dt "mere chnge of opinion of same set of facts doesn't constiute mistke apparnt 4m rcrd." pleas go in detail regardng "MEPCO CASE". VINCAST ENGINEERING(2006)- SAURASHTRA KUCH STOCK EXCHNGE (2008) r d bases on vch i answrd.

MaNThaN Shah (Student) (315 Points)
Replied 17 May 2011

DT Paper with solution download from www.caeduonline.com

CA. Raghav Goyal (CA Practice) (150 Points)
Replied 18 May 2011

Hey frnz,

Plz tell ki ICAI's Case Laws booklet on DT was helpful for MAy 2011 eaxm or not??

For IDT it proved to be a great help!!!!

But i hav not gone through DT Case Laws booklet issued by ICAI.. Now plz tell me if u have gone through that....

CA Arif A. Dadani (Chartered Accountant) (68 Points)
Replied 18 May 2011

in last attempt it was DT paper with full amendments. n dis time it was IDT...this time DT paper was quite easy.... m expecting 60+, all case law asked were very easy and amendments were also very straight forward

Upgrade to CAclubindia Pro. Subscribe Now!

CA SAHIL MITTAL (JOB) (240 Points)
Replied 19 May 2011

Originally posted by : RAAM SINGHANIA
	only 15000 alllowed under sec 80 d to nandita father as he is non resident not 20000as allowed to indian sen. cetizen

I DO NOT AGREE.

THERE IS NO PROVISION IN SECTION 80D WHICH RESTRICT EXTRA RS. 5000 TO RESIDENTS ONLY

sumit (CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT) (479 Points)
Replied 19 May 2011

agree wid sahil

CA. A.D SINGH (NONE) (64 Points)
Replied 20 May 2011

HELLO RAJAT , its clearly written in v.g sir book that supreme court judgement , later amendment in law will make available grounds for invoking 154 section. and also mepco case has different facts from what was asked in question.

CA. A.D SINGH (NONE) (64 Points)
Replied 20 May 2011

HELLO BHUVAN , CHANGE OF OPINION IS CONSIDERED FOR PURPOSE OF SECTION 147 / 263 AND NOT SECTION 154 WHICH TALKS ABOUT MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. AS PER V.G SIR RECORD WILL INCLUDE A SUBSEQUENT SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT . ALSO A LATER AMENDMENT FORMS PART OF RECORD. 154 CAN BE INVOKED IF 4 YEARS FROM DATE OF ORDER SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED HAVE NOT PASSED.