|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
CJI says SC will lay down guidelines for entertaining PILs; President appoints three Judges to AP HC - Justice Desaraju Apparao + Justice Gandhi Bhavani Prasad + Justice Gurram Venkata Seethapathy; 17 killed in train-mini bus collision near Moga in Punjab; FM suggests setting up of 100-200 towns from scratch for infrastructure improvement; Defence Ministry agrees to Nagpur Airport modernisation plans; MoF skeptical of DoT dual tech option for cellular licence holders ; RBI Governor says current fiscal growth to be about 8.5%; FM says Gujarat figures in list of top six seriously indebted States; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Also sending you the following files: |
||
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
cbdt story.doc + cbdtrelease.doc SC sets aside HC interim order allowing I-T return filed in Saral Form in place of new Form; CBDT allows time till Feb 29, 2008 for re-filing returns without interest and penalty; 2007-TIOL-729-HC-RAJ-IT-LB.doc + LB story.doc Income Tax - Deductions under Sec 36 of the Act- Transfer to reserve to be worked out on the gross total income before making deduction under Sec 36 as well as under Chapter VI-A of the Act : RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT LARGER BENCH; Income Tax - Assessee adds back a sum lying unclaimed in the account - sum related to unclaimed sundry creditors - AO invoikes Sec 41(1) and makes addition - CIT(A) upholds action - Tribunal sets aside the addition - Merely adding back the sum unilaterally by the assessee does not mean cessation of the liability unless it is time-barred by the laws of limitation - Revenue's appeal dismissed : ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT; 2007-TIOL-435-ITAT-MUM-SB.doc + sb story.doc Wealth tax -Legal owner vs lessee: It is the legal owner (i.e. the assessee in the case before us) where is liable to the wealth-tax levy on the value of specified assets licensed/leased by him for a term of less than twelve years as laid down in section 269UA (f). However, the legal owner shall not be liable to wealth-tax levy on the value of specified assets leased by him for a term of not less than twelve years by virtue of any such transaction as is referred to in section 269UA (f) of the Income-tax Act. It is in fact the person acquiring any rights (i.e., lessee) in or with respect to any building under a lease for a term of not less than twelve years by virtue of any such transaction as is referred to in section 269UA ( f) of the Income-tax Act who shall be deemed to be the owner thereof in terms of the provisions of section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act. The words in parenthesis are clear enough to indicate that any rights acquired by the lessee by way of lease from month to month or for a period' not exceeding one year shall not affect the legal ownership of the owner and that the legal owner in such a case shall be liable to the wealth tax levy notwithstanding the fact that he has transferred the rights to the lessee by way of lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year. Legal ownership will remain unaffected so long as the term of lease is less than twelve years in terms of the provisions of section 269UA (f) of the Income-tax Act. The fiction created by section 4(8 )( b) applies to leases and not to leave and licence agreements. Leave and licence agreements are clearly outside the scope of section 4(8 )( b) of the Wealth-tax Act. In a leave and licence arrangement, the legal owner shall continue to be the owner of the licensed premises and assessable to wealth-tax as such. : Special Bench MUMBAI ITAT; Income Tax - Assessee is 100% EoU - Return filed and assessee order passed - Invocation of powers u/s 263 by the CIT - SCN issued asking why was depreciation not claimed before claiming deduction u/s 80HHC - Assessee claims the claim of depreciation cannot be forced upon and even if it is claimed the taxable income would remain the same - CIT cancels the assessment order - Assessee argues by the time the CIT passed its order, the AO's order had merged with the CIT(A) order and the CIT had no jurisdiction - limitation also pleaded - Going by the Apex Court decision in CIT V/s M/s Alagendran Finance Ltd ( 2007-TIOL-136-SC-IT ) and the fact that the CIT passed the revisional order after two years of the assessment order, the CIT order set aside on limitation ground : MUMBAI ITAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Central Excise - appeal to High Court under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act - since the issue does not involve substantial question of law but is only pure findings of facts, appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed. We find that no substantial question of law would arise for determination of this Court because these are pure findings of facts. As to whether the assessee-respondent had two units of one entity or there were two different entities is necessarily a question of fact which is further fortified from the fact that only one registration has been made. Had there been two units then the assessee would have been compelled for registration of both independently : P&H HIGH COURT; 2007-TIOL-1919-CESTAT-MUM.doc + eou story.doc Amount paid by the EOU after de-bonding is Cenvatable, rules Tribunal - Division Bench decision in Gokak Mills Ltd. 2006-TIOL-1967-CESTAT-BANG followed :MUMBAI CESTAT; Beams, angles, channels, plates etc., were primarily used in the manufacture of the structure for movement of the EOT cranes - Cenvat Credit available. Explanation 2 to Rule 2 of Cenvat Credit Rules stipulates that Inputs include goods used in the manufacture of capital goods which are further used in the factory of the manufacturer - Scope of input is wide enough - Appellant entitled to take credit on Beams, angles, channels, plates etc., though not as "capital goods" but as inputs :MUMBAI CESTAT; Appeal filed in time but before the wrong authority - Dy.Commissioner sitting in the same building as Commissioner(Appeals) ought to have either forwarded the same to Commr(A) or returned the appeal to the appellant - in these circumstances rejection of the appeal by Commissioner(A) on the ground of time bar is not justified :MUMBAI CESTAT;
Custom House Agents - valuation of taxable services; CASE LAWS 2007-TIOL-226-SC-ST.doc + sc st story.doc ST- Services rendered in India by a foreign service provider - liability to pay interest on defaulted ST - If Appellant itself was liable for payment of tax, it was also liable for payment of statutory interest thereupon, if the same had not been deposited within the time stipulated by the statute. The liability to pay tax was not on the foreign company. Only on default on the part of the appellant the interest was leviable. Appellant was clearly liable therefor. In other words, the liability being that of the appellant, it must accept the liability of payment of interest leviable thereupon in terms of statute occasioned by the breach on its part to deposit the amount of tax within the prescribed time. : SUPREME COURT; 2007-TIOL-1914-CESTAT-BANG.doc Service Tax - Business Auxiliary Service - the appellant is engaged in verifying the correctness, fairness and authenticity of information furnished by those seeking loan from ICICI Bank - these services can not be treated as services rendered in promoting the business of ICICI and not taxable under Business Auxiliary Service - the service is rightly classifiable under Business Support Service and is taxable only with effect from 1.5.06 : BANGALORE CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION NOTIFICATION Textile items get major drawback relief; Higher drawback rates for many items under Chapter 50, 51, 55, 57, 74, 83, 85 & 94 Drawback Not 68/2007 amended to insert tariff items 3918909003 & 630503; CASE LAWS Customs - exemption claimed at the time of filing ex-bond bill of entry denied by the lower authorities on the ground that the same was not claimed at the time of filing into bond bill of entry - Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund - revenue is in appeal before CESTAT - the correspondence between the Deputy Commissioner and the assessee had not been placed before the original authority - the recent Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal was also not available to the authority - matter remanded : CHENNAI CESTAT; 2007-TIOL-1915-CESTAT-BANG.doc Customs - Import of Toyota Land Cruiser - department relied on the letter by the Toyota Kirloskar Motors Ltd to decide the year of manufacture as 2003 and fixed the assessable value and ordered for confiscation - the contention of the appellant that their request for cross examination of the representative of Toyota Kirloskar Motors Ltd was not considered is accepted - matter remanded to give an opportunity to the appellant for cross-examination of the representative of the M/s TKM : BANGALORE CESTAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
ddt 14 dec.doc + kol cus pn.doc TDS on salaries - CBDT instructions; Commencement of Double Shift System for Customs examination work at N.S. Docks; CBI raids 9 premises of three senior STC officials in dal import fraud case; Unveil wasteland utilisation policy; International Union of Railways to market UIC as quality certification agency ; Indo Tech Transformers ties up with E I Dupont for technical support ; Finolex Cables forms JV with J- Power Systems of Japan; Praj Industries forms JV with Brazilian engineering major for ethanol plants ; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. |
