Exports grows by 31.5% last fiscal;

India urges Canada to make visa procedures simpler for students;

Dress in ITAT to get reimbursement for dress and residence expenditure – will DRs in CESTAT also get them? (See 'DDT')

Foreign Trade Policy – One year time to file representations against the decision of Norms Committee (See 'DDT')

Export obligation automatically extended when ban is imposed on exports (See 'DDT')

ddt 3 june.pdf + Reimbursement of Expenses.pdf

Is the Delhi Service Tax blissfully ignorant or brashly arrogant?

rbi07cir046.pdf

External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) by Services Sector - Liberalization;

mbuzz663.pdf

Tele-density leapfrogs to 27% with boradband users crossing 4 mn and 8.2 mn new wireless subscribers in April;

mbuzz662.pdf

Bhavnagar and Rajkot Central Excise book many cement companies for excise evasion ;

2008-TIOL-302-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

CIT Vs Mahaan Foods Ltd ( Dated: March 31, 2008 )

Income Tax - deduction under Section 80-IA.- AO disallows it by terming it as modernisation-cum-expansion programme of the existing undertaking - Assessee says a new undertaking has come into existence - Tribunal dismissed Revenue appeal - Held, since there is no evidence that the assessee transferred the plant and machinery of old business rather it made huge investment into a larger undertaking which subsumed the old business, the law itself envisages such an investment - Sec 80IA benefits cannot be denied : DELHI HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-214-ITAT-HYD-TM.pdf + income sales story.pdf

DCIT, Hyderabad Vs M/s Nagarjuna Agro Tech Ltd (Dated: February 4, 2008 )

Conversion of sales tax liability into loan – no additional Income Tax liable: There is no dispute that assessee became eligible under the Deferred Scheme w.e.f 1.3.94 i.e. the date on which eligibility certificate was admittedly issued to the assessee. After the above date, sales tax payable by the assessee was shown as converted into loan under the Scheme of the State Government in the books. But from the above it cannot follow that the loan was permitted to be converted only on the date on which permission letter was issued. The permission letter whenever issued, would relate back to the date on which liability was converted into loan by the assessee. It is therefore clear that sales tax liabilities converted into loans and up to the last date mentioned above have been permitted. No change was made under the scheme. The assessee is also shown to be liable to repay loan after 7.4.2003. There is no material on record to establish that conversion into loan shown by the assessee was incorrect. Thus, the C ircular of C BDT has been shown to be fully applicable in this case. Assuming for the sake of argument that some other view is also possible, the matter is highly debatable and question of making adjustments u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act could not arise in this case. At any rate, there is no scope to levy additional tax, which has been held to be equal to penalty by their Lordships of Supreme C ourt

Where a return is filed, the law applicable would be the law as it stood on the date of filing of the return : HYDERABAD ITAT (THIRD MEMBER);

2008-TIOL-215-ITAT-HYD.pdf

Circle-6, Surat Vs M/s Shilpi International (Dated: April 2, 2008 )

Monetary limit to file appeal - Revenue's appeal in contravention of CBDT' circular – dismissed as not maintainable : HYDERABAD ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

NOTIFICATION

exnt08_27.pdf

LTU – Delhi Income Tax Chief Commissioner’s jurisdiction added;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-865-CESTAT-DEL.pdf + interest story.pdf

CCE, Bhopal Vs M/s Vindhya Telelinks Ltd (Dated: April 15, 2008)

Interest is paid as a measure of compensation to make good loss for delayed payment – Commr(A) holding that assessee is liable to pay interest from month following month in which provisional assessments were finalized is out and out in conflict with mandate of law: Tribunal :DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-864-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

Shri U D Suryavanshi Vs CCE, Pune-II (Dated: Dec 28, 2008)

Tribunal has considered the entire issue on merits and has also considered the submissions & come to a conclusion – No error apparent on records – applicant is at liberty to file appeal against the order before a higher judicial forum – ROM application dismissed. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-862-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

CCE, Mumbai-III Vs Indian Tube Mills & Metal Industries Ltd (Dated: Dec 19, 2008)

Inputs received at the recipient's end cannot be reassessed by the department – Issue involved is no longer res integra – Tribunal decision in MDS Switchgearcovers the issue – Revenue appeal rejected. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-861-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

CC & CE, Nagpur Vs M/s Narendra Solves Pvt Ltd (Dated: (Dated: January 30, 2008)

Common inputs used for manufacture of dutiable & exempted final products - respondent reversed the entire amount of Cenvat credit on the inputs which were used for the exempted finished products – no further action warranted – Revenue appeal rejected. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-303-HC-RAJ-ST.pdf + st hc story.pdf

Union Of India Vs Aakar Advertising ( Dated: April 23, 2008 )

Service Tax – Tribunal cannot reduce the penalty below the mandatory minimum; Commissioner should have examined whether minimum or maximum penalty should be imposed. A look at the provisions of the section does show, that it does prescribe a minimum amount of penalty, by using the expression “not less than”. Of course, the upper limit has also been prescribed therein. The question precisely is, as to whether the Tribunal, or the authority below, have any authority to impose a penalty, which is even less than the amount permissible to be imposed by Section 76”

May be, that the penalty imposable may be set aside, if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure, then the existence of sufficient cause is a question of fact, which is required to be decided by the authorities below, and if it is found, that there is sufficient cause the penalty can not be imposed, but the question is, that if reasonable cause is not shown, and penalty is required to be levied, then, the minimum penalty prescribed cannot be further reduced, under the garb of any existing discretion, assumed to be vesting, with the authority, including the Tribunal.

Where the two limits have been prescribed, being the minimum and upper limit, then obviously the free play is available between the two limits only, and the discretion can be exercised, within those limits, but then, that does not mean, that the authorities have any power to impose penalty less than the minimum prescribed by the Section.

When Commissioner (Appeals) dismisses an appeal for failure to make pre-deposit, Tribunal cannot decide the appeal on merits – admittedly the requirement of predeposit has not been complied with. Even the Tribunal has not recorded any otherwise finding in this regard, and on the face of language of Section 35F , there is no escape from the conclusion, that the appeal was rightly dismissed by the learned Commissioner, and the learned Tribunal could not entertain the appeal on merits.: RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-866-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + stgst.pdf

M/s International Transmission Products Pvt LtdVs CCE, Mumbai - III (Dated: May 2, 2008)

Cenvat Credit of Service tax on goods transport service, mobile phone service, credit card service and air travel agent – No Prima facie for total waiver – Pre-deposit ordered - Tribunal. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

cnt08_067.pdf

CBEC revises tariff value of poppy seeds and brass scraps;

cnt08_066.pdf + cnt08_065.pdf

CBEC appoints two officers to adjudicate specific DRI cases;

cuscir08_08.pdf

Simplification and procedural relaxation for issue of pre-authenticated CT-3 to EOUs in textile and chemical sector.;

dgft08pn024.pdf

DEPB for export of cement withdrawn;

dgft08pn023.pdf

Export of cement to have DEPB benefit;

dgft08pn022.pdf

Ban on exports – export obligation automatically extended;

dgft08pn021.pdf

One year time to file representation against norms Committee decision, for project supplies;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-863-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

M/s Shah Trading Corporation Vs CC, Mumbai (Dated: Febuary 26, 2008)

Disposable ECG electrodes are accessories used with the D.C.Defibrillator for internal use – Exemption (Nil duty) available in terms of Notification No. 17/2001 Cus dated 1.3.2001 – Appeal allowed.

ECG Electrodes can be used both with D.C. Defibrillator for external use as well as for internal use - Notification in question covers accessories and parts of D.C. Defibrillator for internal use. : MUMBAI CESTAT;