BullBD Old Apps Site
Home
Favorites
Recently viewed Details Chart Today news Share news Top gainer Top Looser Upcoming events
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 All
Bank Cement Ceramics Sector Corporate Bond Engineering Financial Institutions Food & Allied Fuel & Power IT Sector Insurance Jute Life Insurance Miscellaneous Mutual Funds Paper & Printing Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Services & Real Estate Tannery Industries Telecommunication Textile Travel & Leisure All
  • Details
  • Chart
  • News

BDSERVICE

All Eps Dividend Board Agm Q1 Q2 Q3

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): supplementary duty prior to 1 July 2012 has no legal basis. The LTU-VAT has issued a demand notice on same matter claiming additional supplementary duty and VAT on sale of beverages and floor show income of Tk 12,733,543 for the period from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013 which has been provided for by the Company. However, VAT Large Taxpayers Unit (LTU) vide a letter dated 30 March 2009, alleged that for those hotels which (Cont.19)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): business after taking Value Added Tax (VAT) registration from relevant authority. As per SRO No 152/Law/2005/443-VAT dated 9 June 2005, hotels under service code SOO1.1O was exempted from supplementary duty.2012 and clearly spelt out collection of supplementary duty from supply of alcoholic beverages and organization of floor show, management believes that this supports the Hotel's argument that the earlier imposition of (Cont.18)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): Since these matters are pending and the Company believes on reasonable ground that such alleged objection shall be quashed in favor of the Company in due course by the appropriate authority no provision has been made for such disputed claims. D) Additional supplementary duty and VAT on sale of alcoholic beverages and floor show. The erstwhile Dhaka Sheraton Hotel (now renamed as Ruposhi Bangla Hotel) has been conducting its Hotel (Cont.17)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): The Company is defending these objections as it believes that these were neither factually correct nor consistent with the prevailing VAT legislation. The Company maintains its position that all VAT rebates claimed are legitimate, relevant requirements of the VAT Act 1991 have been appropriately followed and any withholding VAT are duly deposited to the Government exchequer. (Cont.16)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): operation of the Company, the LTU - VAT has also issued demand notices of Tk. 282,159,786 for the years 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 and Tk 120,220,847 for the year 2012-2013 on the grounds of not collecting supplementary duty and VAT on supplementary duty from sale of alcoholic beverages at restaurants of the Hotel and taking rebate on restaurant services without price declaration. (Cont.15)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): C) Value added tax (VAT) and supplementary duty: Large Taxpayers Unit (LTU) - VAT has issued a demand notice to the Company for Tk 24,732,774 which allegedly resulted from claiming VAT rebates on certain items, not paying VAT on rent received and unpaid VAT as deducted at source from suppliers for the period July 2005 to June 2010. Pursuant to an audit conducted by the Local and Revenue Audit Department on the Hotel (Cont.14)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): 5,954,210 and BDT 9,340,009 respectively against which the Company has made appeals to relevant appeal authority which are still pending. No provision has been made in the accounts for the additional amount claimed by the tax authority as the Company has reasonable grounds to believe its appeal against such unjust additional demand will be ultimately successful and these would be set aside at the time disposal of final appeal. (Cont.13)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): Against the guarantee, the Company has paid a sum of Taka 920,215 as margin against bank guarantee and the amount is shown under sundry debtors in these financial statements. No provision has been made in these financial statements against the above. B) Income tax pending matters: The income authority has made an additional claim for the assessment years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 amounting to BDT(Cont.12)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): to pay the entire amount of Taka 9,200,346 to the contractor. The Company has filed an appeal with the Hon'ble High court in 2004 against the verdict, the ultimate outcome of which is uncertain. To comply with the terms of the contest petition, the (Continuation news of BDSERVICE): Company issued a bank guarantee in favour of the court amounting to Taka 9,200,346 which has been shown as contingent liability being letter of guarantee in the books of the Company. (Cont.11)

BDSERVICE 05-Dec-2019

(Continuation news of BDSERVICE): The contractor filed a petition to the 3rd Sub Judge Court of Dhaka to enforce the award given by the umpire, whereas the Company decided to contest it. The case was sent back on remand by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 02 July 2001 passed in F.M.A no: 235/99 filed by BSL with a direction to dispose of the matter. Recently the 3rd Sub Judge court has upheld its previous verdict in favor of contractor and directed the Company (Cont.10)

Previous Next page