|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
PM's Economic Advisory Council predicts 8.9% growth for current fiscal and 8.5% growth for 2008-09; Australia voices concern over India giving sops to sugar exports; Cabinet gives nod to MoU between India & Southern African Customs Union for exchange of tariff concessions on select list of items + grants exemption to filling up of 246 technical posts of various commodities boards under Ministry of Commerce + Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty with Australia + creation of a JS-level post in NACO; CESTAT invites applications for Member (T) posts (See 'Common Basket' for details); Australia urges USA to ratify Kyoto Protocol; PM's Council asks for excise duty cut to stimulate manufacturing; FM videoconferences with CCITs and thanks Income Tax Department for 43% growth in collections but calls for better taxpayers' services; Govt reconstitutes Press Council of India with 28 Members; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Also sending you the following files: |
||
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
TRANSFER ORDER CBDT issues local transfer order of 67 CITs; Tour Programme of CCITs; CASE LAWS 2008-TIOL-40-HC-DEL-IT.doc + late hc story.doc Taxing of interest; accrual basis: We find that this contention urged by learned counsel for the Revenue is completely contrary to the contention urged by the Revenue for the last several years, namely, that the amount is liable to be taxed on an accrual basis. We say this because as held by this Court on 8th November, 1990 while disposing of ITC No.159 /1987 that the stand of the Revenue is that the interest is taxable on accrual basis. Even the Assessee had accepted this contention of the Revenue and, therefore, there can be no doubt that the amount is liable to be taxed only on accrual basis. It is now too late in the day, after 17 years , for the Revenue to raise the contention that the amount is liable to be taxed on receipt basis. Even otherwise, we find no reason to differ with the view already expressed by this Court on an earlier occasion.:DELHI HIGH COURT; Income Tax - Sec 69D - Assessee's premises searched - A document on assessee's letterhead found - AO presumes it to be a hundi and makes addition - CIT (A) thoroughly examines and holds it was not a hundi - Tribunal agrees with the CIT(A) - For invoking the deeming provision of Sec 69D it is important that the document must be a hundi which is not the case in the instant event as it is only about a bilateral transaction without any corresponding entry in the books and was also not on a hundi paper - Every document cannot be believed to be a hundi unless it has certain necessary characteristics - Revenue's appeal set aside:DELHI HIGH COURT; Income Tax - Petitioners purchase a property from one of the respondents - Income Tax order of attachment was not there at the time of registration of sale deed - Since the respondent no 1 which had given some loans to the seller of the property agaisnt the mortgage continued to issue TDS certificate in favour of the seller rather than the purchaser - It was done as per the instruction of the Income Tax Authorities - Meanwhile, Revenue declares the sale deed registration as null and void - Since it is established law that if the Revenue believes that a property being transferred to a third party to defraud it, the authorities will have to file a suit under Rule 11(6) to get the transfer declared void under Sec 281 of the I-T Act - Respondent No 1 directed to rectify the TDS certificates and issue the same in favour the petitioners who are the owners of the property now: BOMBAY HIGH COURT; Income Tax - Assessee files loss return and revises it to declare income after some time - Scrutiny proceedings initiated and assessment order passed - CIT invokes revisional powers u/s 263 and directs AO to recompute the taxable income after disallowing interest expenditure u/s 14A - Tribunal allows assessee's appeal - Merely because a second view is possible on the issue, the CIT does not acquire revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 - AO's order upheld: P & H HIGH COURT;
Call centre – telecom expenditure - once expenses incurred are for business, it will be nobody's case to disallow the same as having not been incurred for rendering the services as a call centre: ITAT With the wide increase of telecommunication services and the thrust of the assessee in running a call centre, it becomes important to note that once the expenses incurred are for the business, it will be nobody's case to disallow the same as having not been incurred for rendering the services as a call centre by the assessee, who has claimed deduction u/s. 10A , which the AO verified as another provision of section 10A compared to section 80HHE. (Look For Full Text Tomorrow) |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
2008-TIOL-05-SC-CX.doc + ssi story.doc SSI – exemption – use of brand name of another person - the nexus between the hexagonal design and the Marketing Company cannot be found when the Marketing Company itself had categorically disowned the title to the said design and admitted that the said design did not belong to them. That being the position, it cannot be held that the appellant was using the brand name of the Marketing Company when the Marketing Company has itself disowned the brand name, more so, since it is unusual that the person who is owning a brand name would come forward to disown the same when such disowning would deprive the said person of a valuable asset. The hexagonal design cannot be said to be descriptive enough to serve as an indicator of nexus between the goods of the appellant and the Marketing Company; the alleged monogram cannot be said to be the brand name or trade name of the Marketing Company, and such being the position, the benefit of exemption provided by the notification is available to the appellant. : SUPREME COURT; 2008-TIOL-89-CESTAT-MUM-LB.doc + lb story.doc Valuation of Physician Samples – Board's Circular dated 01.07.2002 is to be applied retrospectively for the period from 01.07.2000 – Beneficial Circular to operate with retrospective effect - Larger Bench of the Tribunal: MUMBAI CESTAT; Duty paid on own volition treated as deposit & appropriated by the Department under section 11D of CEA'44 - Once there is no demand of duty the question of setting aside the same does not arise. Denial of credit to customers - it is the customer who only can file an appeal and not the alleged manufacturer. Appellants have already been penalized in the form of duty voluntarily paid by them which was not payable and the credit of the same has also been denied to its customer – imposition of any further penalty would be harsh – Penalty set aside. : MUMBAI CESTAT; Central Excise - Interest demanded for using fortnightly payment system for clearing inputs and capital goods as such - Revenue argues such a payment facility is only for duty payment on finished goods - Tribunal's decision in Cadila Healthcare 2007-TIOL-300-CESTAT-MUM already settles the issue in favour of the assessee - Revenue's appeal set aside: MUMBAI CESTAT;
SERVICE TAX SECTION ST - Cenvat credit availed for service tax paid on mobile phones as input service - DR argues the Tribunal's decision in Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd (2006-TIOL-1152-CESTAT-MUM) has been challenged before the High Court - No force in DR's submissions - Revenue's appeal rejected: DELHI CESTAT; Credit of Service tax in respect of Security services for providing security to the residential colony of the employees within the factory premises – issue highly arguable – since no prima facie case made out pre-deposit ordered.: MUMBAI CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION NOTIFICATION Govt withdraws anti-dumping duty on PHPG Base; ctariff08_009.doc + ctariff08_008.doc Anti-dumping duty on import of PHPG Base withdrawn; CASE LAWS Customs – refund of duty on ship stores consumed on a foreign vessel - during onward journey to India and their journey from India the vessel was not involved in carrying any goods or passengers - They were granted permission to operate the vessel as a coastal vessel - even if they had not actually engaged in the coastal run, the status of the vessel in India during their stay in the Indian port for about year cannot be treated as that of a foreign going vessel and can only be held as a coastal vessel – order of the lower authority rejecting the refund upheld: AHMEDABAD CESTAT; Customs – penalty on the appellant under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act – other two people dealing in the goods who were on records, but were not traced for trial - The investigation could not be said to have been completed when the other persons were absconding- extent of investigation made was whether complete is not ascertainable - In absence of completion of investigation and without bringing all the offenders to record, the present Appellant may not be apprehended to be guilt – matter remanded to make a fair trial bringing entire evidence into record: KOLKATA CESTAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
Stay put in your jurisdiction – CBDT tells Chief Commissioners; EASIEST – RBI guidelines – banks not to accept if the assessee code is not mentioned in the challan; Globalisation is equal to urbanisation of poverty poverty of 'localised governance' in India ! Service Tax: The fine dividing line between indivisible contract and composite contract; CESTAT invites applications for Member (T) posts; Kerala gets nod to build Greenfield International Airport through PPP route at Kannur; Govt to amend IT Act to deal with cyber crime: Minister; Wildlife Crime Control Bureau shows impressive results in first three months; Tata Steel forms JV with Uyun Limestone in Oman; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. |
