President appoints six Addl Judge in P&H HC + 3 in Rajasthan HC;

Export ban on cement not to apply to supplies to SEZ + Nepal (See 'Indirect Tax Basket')

FM approves CBEC foreign posting file; Two new names replace two panelists for HK & London;

Alstom willing to offer locomotives to Indian Railways at cheaper rate;

Export duty on steel supplied to SEZ: MoF yet to form an opinion;

RBI gives nod to merger of Centurion Bank of Punjab with HDFC w.e.f May 23;

Karnataka hooch tragedy: Death tally mounts to 128;

2008-TIOL-115-SC-IT .pdf + sc it story.pdf

American Hotel & Lodging Association Education Institute Vs CBDT (Dated: May 9, 2008)

Income Tax - Exemption u/s 10(23)(vi) - Appellant is an Indian branch of an American educational institution - signs MoU with Ministry of Tourism for certain specialised courses, course materials and improvement in educational quality in hospitality - applies for exemption u/s 10(22) and also opts for Advance Ruling which goes in its favour and Revneue accepts the same - Sec 10(22) stands omitted by Finance Act, 1998 w.e.f. 1.4.1999 - Appellant makes application for fresh exempton in standarised format - The Prescribed Authority (PA) CBDT rejects the application as the appellant had remitted some money to its Head Office in American rather than spending the same in India for education - Writ filed - High Court rules in favour of CBDT on the ground that the surplus generated by the appellant not spending 'in India' as prescribed by the proviso of the relevant Section - Granting exemption is the first stage and the CBDT cannot reject application at the threhold level by enforcing monitoring conditions prescribed under third and twelfth provisos as compliance to such conditions like application of money in tune with the objects etc may be examined later at the assessment stage and the PA is at liberty to prescribe any condition, including certain percetage of accounting money to be spent in India but cannot reject the application - Case remanded to the CBDT - Appellant's appeal allowed

The expression 'in India' - the third proviso to Section 10(23C)(vi), which refers to monitoring conditions, confines the words "application of income" to the objects for which the Institution is established. The third proviso does not use the words "in India" in the matter of application or accumulation of income though in several other sections like Sections 10(20A), 10(22B) and 11(1)(a) etc., Parliament has used the words "in India". Therefore, the words "in India" cannot be read into the third proviso. : SUPREME COURT ;

2008-TIOL-193-ITAT-HYD.pdf

M/s Deccan Cements Ltd Vs ACIT, Hyderabad (Dated: January 18, 2008)

Income Tax - Traveling, Consultancy expenditure – allowable as Revenue Expenditure : HYDERABAD ITAT ;

2008-TIOL-192-ITAT-MUM.pdf

Eklavya Visions Pvt Ltd Vs ITO, Mumbai (Dated: March 27, 2008)

Income Tax - Penalty - Assessee receives a loan - AO disallows it on the ground of lack of genuineness and treats it as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 - Merely because the assessee failed to produce the person who loaned the sum to him does not mean that the assessee failed to explain, and mere rejection of explanation ipso facto cannot lead to levy of penalty - Assessee's appeal allowed : MUMBAI ITAT ;

2008-TIOL-191-ITAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd Vs DCIT, Delhi (Dated: April 11, 2008)

Income Tax - Assessee claims public issue expenses as revenue expenditure - claims that the Provisions of Sec 35-D to apply and 10% of the expenditure liable to be allowed during the year – AO treats it as capital expenditure - Given that the assessee is into the business of construction of buildings it does not not fit into the criteria of being considered as 'industrial undertaking' or 'industrial unit' under the common parlance meaning, and cannot be said to be entitled to Section 35D benefits

AO disallows expenses incurred at AGM on ad hoc basis by attributing the same towards entertainment expenditure u/s 37(2) of the Act - The AGM meetings and the Board meetings are statutory functions under the Companies Act and that the said expenditure is not in the nature of entertainment expenditure within the meaning of section 37 (2) of the IT Act 1961, following the earlier decision of the Tribunal, the disallowance is deleted : DELHI ITAT ;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-113-SC-CX.pdf

CCE, Belapur Vs M/s Simplex Infrastructure Ltd (Dated: April 10, 2008)

Central Excise - Ready Mix Concrete - whether manufactured at site - the Tribunal has stated in its order that there was no dispute between the parties that RMC was manufactured at site.

We do not know on what basis the said finding is recorded by the Tribunal, particularly when the Commissioner in the above order has held that RMC has been manufactured at Pen and Padghe and thereafter moved to the construction site. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was no dispute that RMC was manufactured at site. Keeping the arguments on both sides open and further giving liberty to both sides to file additional documents, we set aside the impugned order and we remit the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law. : SUPREME COURT ;

2008-TIOL-786-CESTAT-AHM-LB.pdf + LB story.pdf

CC & CE, DAMAN Vs M/s Cello Household Appliances Ltd (Dated: May 5, 2008)

Plastic shelves used in bathroom for keeping small items like tooth paste, brushes, creams and soaps etc. or on table top or in kitchen are “household articles" & not “furniture” - classifiable under sub-heading 3924.90 : AHMEDABAD (LARGER BENCH );

2008-TIOL-785-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + dlink story.pdf

M/s D-LINK (India) Ltd Vs CCE, Goa (Dated: April 10, 2008)

D-linked – C.Ex. Valuation Case – sandwiching cost of IT peripherals into the value of driver software - Pay pre-deposit of Rs.50 lakhs each, says the Tribunal.

Undervaluing the dutiable IT peripherals by shifting or loading a part of the value thereof in the value of the accompanying essential non duty paid driver software in media format – Tribunal finds no prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit – extended period invokable – no financial hardship pleaded - Orders pre-deposit. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-784-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Shankeshwar (Tex) India Vs CCE, Jaipur-II (Dated: Nov 15, 2007)

Where the jurisdictional High Court has taken a particular view on interpretation or proposition of law, that view has to be followed in cases within such jurisdiction – Tribunal has power to reduce penalty u/s 11AC – as duty paid before issue of scn, penalty reduced to 25% of duty. : DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-783-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

CC & CE, Hyderabad Vs M/s Premier Explosives Ltd., Karimnagar District (Dated: February 7, 2008)

Central Excise – Price variation - Refund -   Due to the price variation clause in the agreement with the buyer there was reduction in price of the goods. Refund to be examined even if the assessment is final as the claim is filed within the time limit. (Para 9) : BANGALORE CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-781-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s RKBK Ltd Vs CCE, Allahabad (Dated: March 24, 2008)

ST - C & F Service - Assessee disputes the levy of tax on reimbursed amount - Revenue argues that since the agreement does not talk about reimbursement of expenses, the tax to be levied on gross amount - Waiver of pre-deposit denied : DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-780-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Market Chase Advertising Vs CCE, Madurai (Dated: February 13, 2008)

Service Tax – Preparation of traffic signals – not advertising service :CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

dgft08not012.pdf

Export ban on cement not to apply to supplies to SEZ + Nepal;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-114-SC-CUS.pdf

CC, New Delhi Vs M/s Chandigarh Lithotripsy Centre Ltd (Dated: April 10, 2008)

Customs – exemption – appellant required to produce installation certificate within two years. Certificate submitted to DGHS , New Delhi which was returned to it with a direction to resumbit same through the State Health Department which the respondent did within two years of the import of the machinery. The finding recorded by the Tribunal is a finding of fact which stands unrebutted . Accordingly, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. The Civil Appeal is dismissed : SUPREME COURT ;

2008-TIOL-782-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

M/s Hindustan Lever Ltd Vs CC, Nhava Sheva (Dated: February 29, 2008)

Appellants, a Golden Super Star Trading House status holder have distorted facts in their attempt to avail inadmissible DEPB benefit – contravention of Rule 14 of the FTC (D & R) Rules, 1993 and Section 50 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962 proved – goods rightly held liable for confiscation & appellant liable to penalty u/s 113 & 114 respectively. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

ddt 21 may.pdf

Payment under Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules – CBEC clarifies;

spldown.pdf

Simultaneous availing of SSI exemption and Credit;

funding training.pdf

Partial funding of foreign study: DoP&T clarifies facility is available only for 200 top universities and not others:

RBI Notifi For Financial Statement.pdf

Accounting Standards: Consolidated Financial Statement;

mbuzz628.pdf

Govt notifies Draft of Coastal Management Zone;

mbuzz627.pdf

BEML signs MoU with Coal Inida for joint production of OTR tyres ;

mbuzz626.pdf

Indo-German annual consultation on development cooperation begins ;

mbuzz625.pdf

Laloo doles out Rs 17.4 Cr cash awards for impressive show;

mbuzz624.pdf

India Post launches Digi Frank Plus ;