|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Delhi Postal Circle & RBI join hands to distribution of coins and exchange of soiled notes through select post offices; DoT Panel on spectrum allocation invites suggestions from stakeholders; Cyclone leaves India alone; batters Bangladesh coastal areas; Rising rupee graph: FM makes no promise but tells exporters Govt will consider certain steps; SC grants relief to SEBs for payment of interest on security deposits; Bangalore CESTAT hosting mega Silver Jubilee function today; Karnataka HC Chief Justice to be Chief Guest; Cabinet okays proposal to signing DTAA with Iceland + amendment in Mines and Minerals (Devt & Regulation) Act + hike in ITDC authorised capital from Rs 75 Cr to Rs 150 Cr; President appoints Addl Judges Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi and Justice Dharnidhar Jha as full-time judges of Patna HC; Govt to set up National Wine, Meat & Poultry Board by Jan 2008: Sahai; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Also sending you the following files: |
||
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
2007-TIOL-202-SC-IT.doc + sc it story Income Tax - Section 80 HHC of the I.T. Act was not a charging section - It was an incentive provision - Its object was not to ascertain real income. The expression "derived from" in the said sub-section is narrower than the expression "attributable to", therefore, it is only "profits derived from exports" which become the basis for working out the said formula in Section 80HHC (3). before giving Deduction, under Section 80HHC (3)(a), (b) or (c) of the I.T. Act, the gross total income of the assessee being profits from business had to be arrived at in terms of clause (baa) to the said Explanation. It is important that deduction has to be from profits as understood in the commercial sense. Moreover, under clause (baa)(1), 90% of any amount referred to in clause ( iiia ), ( iiib ) and ( iiic ) of Section 28 of the I.T. Act or any receipts by way of brokerage, commission, interest, rent, charges or any other receipt of a similar nature included in such profits. Processing charges, which was part of gross total income, was an independent income like rent, commission, brokerage etc. and, therefore, 90% of the said sum had to be reduced from the gross total income to arrive at the Business Profits and since the said processing charge was an important component of Business Profits, it also had to be included in the total turnover in the said formula to arrive at business profits in terms of clause (baa) to the said Explanation. In terms of clause (baa), 90% of the "independent income" had to be deducted from gross total income to arrive at Business Profits to which the fraction had to be applied. Since, the processing charges constituted independent income similar to rent, commission, etc., which formed part of the gross total income, the same had to be reduced by 90% as contemplated in clause (baa) to arrive at Business Profits. Therefore, the said processing charges were includible in the total turnover in the formula under Section 80HHC ( 3) of the I.T. Act. The nature of every receipt needs to be ascertained in order to find out whether the said receipt forms part of/or that it has an attribute of an export turnover - When an indirect tax is collected by the taxpayer on behalf of the government the tax recovered is for the government. It may be an income in the conceptual sense or even under the I.T. Act but while working out the formula under Section 80HHC (3) of the I.T. Act and while applying the four variables one has to ascertain whether the receipt has an attribute of export turnover: SUPREME COURT; Income Tax - Sec 80HH and Sec 80I benefits - Assessee claims deduction on imported gensets of certain capacity to complete its porfolio of products and also spares parts used for sales and after-sales purposes - Revenue denies it - Tribunal also agrees with the AO - Since profits from sale of imported gensets cannot be said to be derived from industrial undertaking as it has no direct and immediate nexus, it is not eligible for deductions - Tribunal order also upheld for disallowing benefits on spares which are incidental to the business but cannot be said to ber directly linked to the industrial activity - Assessee's appeal dismissed: DELHI HIGH COURT; Wealth Tax - Assessee declares lower value of shares of a company against the higher value declared by other share holders - AO adopts the higher value - CIT (A) directs the AO to recompute the market value on the 'yield basis' - Tribunal upholds the CIT(A) order - Issue is no longer res integra as the Apex Court has held that Rule 1D is not in conflict with Sec 7 of the Wealth Tax Act and the issue is settled in favour of the Revenue: P&H HIGH COURT; Income Tax - Tribunal disallows Sec 80IB benefits on duty drawback payments - Since the issue is no more res integra, the appeal does not merit any argument - Assessee's appeal dismissed: P&H HIGH COURT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
2007-TIOL-1768-CESTAT-DEL.doc + alcohol story.doc Appellant manufacturing medicament containing Alcohol but discharging Central Excise duty by availing cenvat credit on FFM which contains 44% Ethyl Alcohol - no cause for reversal of cenvat credit - Madras HC decision & Tribunal decision in Systematic Steel Industries Ltd. followed:DELHI CESTAT; Mandatory penalty - It is clear that the reliance placed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the decision of the Larger Bench in Machino Montell (I) Ltd. for setting-aside the penalty and interest, cannot be sustained in view of the fact that the said decision has been reversed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Except the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan's decision on which reliance is placed by the respondent, the decisions of the other High Courts, i.e., of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad and Hon'ble High Court of Bombay have categorically taken the view that, there is no discretion left with the authority to impose any lesser penalty of 100% and 25% warranted by Section 11AC and that the language of the provisions of Section 11AC was clear, requiring penalty equal to the amount of duty to be imposed, if the situation demanded imposition of penalty and that once the case is covered by the situation mentioned in Section 11AC , mere deposit prior to the issuance of show cause notice will not take the case out of the provisions of Section 11AC . The appeal is, accordingly, allowed.:DELHI CESTAT; Limitation - Allegation in the SCN is that the Respondent has availed credit during the period 1997 to 1999 without presenting on demand by Audit party duty paying documents - such duty paying documents are required to be given along with RT 12 Return & there is no allegation that the same were not annexed - If these documents were not annexed to the Return for availing credit it is not understood as to why the Revenue kept silent for a period of 4 to 6 years and issued the show cause notice only on 2.1.2003 - Demand clearly time barred.: MUMBAI CESTAT;
SERVICE TAX SECTION ST - Business Auxiliary Service - Assessee arranges finance / loans for customers from various banks - Demand confirmed and the assessee pays tax with interest - Reviewing authorities imposes penalty - Since there was a lot of confusion about the provisions and also uncertainty about whether such a service is covered under any notified taxable services, the assessee cannot be accused of mala fide and since it immediately paid the tax with interest it is a fit case for Sec 80 benefits: DELHI CESTAT; ST - GTA Service during 1997-98 period - Tax with penalty u/s 78 demanded as assessee failed to file return and to even inform the Revenue about the service being availed - Assessee pleads limitation - Revenue argues going by the Tribunal's decision in Mangalam Cement case it is not time-barred - Since no ground for waiver from pre-deposit is made out and the financial hardship pleaded being a BIFR company is also no ground as the pre-deposit u/s 35F does not fall under any of the categories in Section 22 of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 - Pre-deposit ordered: DELHI CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION NOTIFICATION Handbook amended to insert Para 2.8(v) for certain categories of importers/ exporters like Govt of India, Dept of Atomic Energy & Ordinance Factories; Amends export policy of onions; CBEC once again makes no change in tariff value of edible oils; CASE LAWS Is concessional rate of Customs duty provided under EPCG Schemes applicable for clearances from EOU ? - Rs. 2.31 Crores demand stayed: MUMBAI CESTAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Cenvat availed capital goods cleared as such - The full circle- Is the problem solved? Facilities for ITAT DRs in Delhi; 2007-TIOL-201-SC-FEMA.doc + adani story.doc FEMA - Rs 13.5 Cr case - matter remanded to Tribunal - High Court was not justified in going into the merits of the case while dealing with a writ regarding pre-deposit: FEMA - SUPREME COURT; 2007-TIOL-200-SC-CT.doc + alladin story.doc Sales Tax - School-Girls watching ' Alladin ' without tickets - It is irrational that as against a tax liability of Rs.3006 /-, penalty of Rs.4 ,39,000 /- was to be imposed - Assessee's appeal allowed: SUPREME COURT; Applications invited for JS-level CEO post in Price Stabilisation Fund Trust in Ministry of Commerce; RBI Notification Deposit Schemes.doc Deposit schemes with lock-in period; DRI books 100% EoU for evading Rs 50 lakhs Customs duty; KEC International bags new projects worth Rs 637 Cr; RBI orders banks to discontinue deposit schemes with lock-in period with immediate effect; L&T, Paul Wurth Consortium bags Rs 580 cr order from Bokaro Steel Plant; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. |
