DRI seizes fake Indian currency notes worth Rs.20 lakhs in Rajasthan corridor; 2 persons arrested;

Hiking retirement age of govt employees to 62: UPA Govt weighing pros & cons;

Law Minister says no proposal to allow foreign solicitors to participate in judicial process but issue being discussed with Bar Council of India;

Vacancies of judges in higher judicial forums: 4 in SC and 100 in HCs as of Nov 1, 2007: Law Minister;

PM launches Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme;

2007-TIOL-675-HC-DEL-IT.doc

Income Tax - Assessee makes provision for gratuity and claims deduction - AO disallows on the ground that it was unascertained liability - Tribunal allows it - Just becasue a liability has not been calculated it cannot become unascertained and the AO should have made inquiry about the nature of liability - then Section 40A (7) (b) of the Act will have an overriding effect over Section 43B of the Act and since the contribution has been made to one of the approved gratuity funds, the Tribunal has rightly allowed deduction - Revenue's appeal dismissed: DELHI HIGH COURT;

2007-TIOL-674-HC-ALL-IT.doc

:Income Tax - Assessee is paid compensation by the State Govt for acquiring lands - Assessee buys new lands within two years and takes benefits of Sec 54B - AO counts out the period of two years and denies the benefits - Calculation of two-year period - Tribunal is for calculation fromm the date of possession - The the word 'transfer' should be read as the date on which the compensation amount is paid to the assessee - Revenue's appeal dismissed: ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT;

2007-TIOL-673-HC-MP-IT.doc

No question of fact in appeal: It will be clear from the aforesaid findings of the Tribunal in the impugned order that on the materials available on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was not justified in making the addition of Rs. 7 ,08,184 as income of the respondent on account of the interest payable or paid by M/s. Siddharth Soya Products Pvt. Ltd. The aforesaid conclusion of the Tribunal being a pure question of fact on the materials available before the Tribunal, no substantial question of law arose for decision. The first question formulated by the order dated February 28, 2007, is thus, not a question of law and cannot be raised in appeal under section 260A of the Act,

Interest from date of original demand but on the reduced amount: The Tribunal, therefore, was not correct in coming to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer cannot demand interest from the date of original demand notice. The Assessing Officer, in our considered opinion, can demand interest from the date of original demand notice but not on the amount originally assessed but on the amount as reduced by the appellate order: MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT;

2007-TIOL-14-ARA-IT.doc + ara story.doc

Income Tax - Advance Ruling - Assessee is a non-resident transferee of shares of a India-based Joint Venture, transferred by a non-resident individual transferor - capital gains - Since the situs of the capital assets giving rise to capital gains arising out of the deal struck overases between two non-resident entities is located in India, the capital gains as per the provisions of Sec 9(1)(i) is inescapably taxable in India, and since as per the inclusive clause of Sec 163, the transferee has paid the sale consideration for the shares bought in the Indian JV, he is to be treated as the agent of the non-resident seller for paying the capital gains: ADVANCE RULING AUTHORITY;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2007-TIOL-672-HC-P-H-CX.doc

Central Excise - Power to remand - Issue no longer res integra as Commissioner(A) power to remand back cases is taken away from Finance Act, 2001: P&H HIGH COURT;

2007-TIOL-1788-CESTAT-MUM.doc + Chemspec Story.doc

Incorrect cenvat availment also attracts penalty under rule 25 & interest in terms of Rule 8(3) of the CER – A Double whammy by Tribunal: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2007-TIOL-1787-CESTAT-MUM.doc

Central Excise – valuation – sale to related units – Tribunal earlier on remand directed the Commissioner to adjust the excess/short payment of duty by adopting 115%/110% of the cost of production - This direction of the Tribunal could not have been ignored on the plea taken by the Commissioner that there is no statutory provisions for doing so – matter remanded again with the specific direction to re-calculate the duty only for the normal period – penalty set aside:MUMBAI CESTAT;

2007-TIOL-1786-CESTAT-MUM.doc

Central Excise – clandestine clearances – demand based on the payment made to the Mathadi and unprotected labour board for loading of the finished goods and unloading of the raw material – there is also a file recovered containing hand written chart of hourly production – there is clinching evidence of suppression of production and clandestine removal – demand of duty upheld – however, matter remanded to re-determine the penalty since part of the demand pertains to the period prior to insertion of Section 11AC:MUMBAI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2007-TIOL-676-HC-MUM-ST.doc + st hc story.doc

Service Tax - Penalty imposed by adjudication officer set aside by tribunal - Commissioner's order enhancing penalty set aside by tribunal - no question of law arises:BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2007-TIOL-1783-CESTAT-MUM.doc

ST - Management Consultancy Service - Assessee claims to be providing supply of staionary, conveyance, water bills stamping etc - Such services may not be covered under the 'Management Consultancy' Serive - Recovery of demand stayed: MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

cus_insfile07_502.doc

CHA Licence: Reference from field formations;

CASE LAWS

2007-TIOL-1785-CESTAT-KOL.doc

Customs – penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act - neither the show cause notice nor the order of adjudication brought clearly the charge against the appellant to fulfill the condition under Section 112 (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 - penalising both the appellants would be unjust and uncalled for - when the goods were not liable for confiscation, levy of penalty without specific charge against the appellant is also not correct - penalty levied on both the appellants are waived and the appeals are allowed:KOLKATA CESTAT;

2007-TIOL-1784-CESTAT-MUM.doc

Contention that imports were at lower value as the goods were from stock lot -Held - If so, the importers ought to have declared the fact even at the time of import - Expert view that the goods imported were brand new and were fit for use for Cinematography - Demand confirmed:MUMBAI CESTAT;

ddt 20 nov.doc

Anti Dumping Duty on acrylic fibre – resurrection?

Agony at Air Customs;

Issue of Custom House Agent Licence – Board clarifies;

2007-TIOL-204-SC-CT.doc + CST story.doc

CST - on factual aspect that the goods which were triggered from Rourkela and sold to the subsidiaries of the CIL through the appellant's consignment agents were essentially meant to be sold to the subsidiaries of the CIL and the goods primarily triggered from Rourkela and were sent to the subsidiaries of the CIL amounted to inter-State sale and the view taken by the Division Bench of the Orissa High Court is correct: SUPREME COURT;

vacancy.doc

JS-level CEO post in PSF;

mbuzz059.doc

OECD to host high-level meet on fight against corruption in Rome tomorrow;