Banking facilities to visually challenged (See 'DDT');

Mobile payment – RBI wants banks to go slow (See 'DDT')

Cabinet okays merger of State Bank of Saurashtra with SBI + amendments in SBI Bill, 2006 + communication towers on defence land + setting up of 'Stem Cell Science & Regenerative Medicine' + creation of Armed Forces Tribunal;

Telecom Commission for waiver of licence fee for rural telephony;

ddt 24 july.pdf + rbi_letter.pdf + rbimobile.pdf

Ignited ideas yet to be extinguished – Intaxication at its worst - Service Tax on Liquor manufacturers – Draft Circular kept in cold storage?

cobweb.pdf

UPA Govt wins but democracy gets asphyxiated!

mbuzz818.pdf

Govt packages norms for aid to victims of terrorist and communal violence;

mbuzz817.pdf

TRAI issues detailed guidelines for TV Rating Points;

mbuzz816.pdf

TRAI seeks feedback to amend tariff order, 1999;

2008-TIOL-141-SC-IT.pdf + oriental story.pdf

CIT, Delhi VI Vs Oriental Insurance Co Ltd (Dated: July 18, 2008)

Disputes between government undertakings – No time limit to approach the COD :- It needs to be emphasized that there was actually no rigid time frame indicated by this Court. The emphasis on one month's time was to show urgency needed. Merely because there is some delay in approaching the Committee that does not make the action illegal. The Committee is required to deal with the matter expeditiously so that there is no unnecessary backlog of appeals which ultimately may not be pursued. In that sense, it is imperative that the concerned authorities take urgent action otherwise the intended objective would be frustrated. :SUPREME COURT;

2008-TIOL-140-SC-IT-LB.pdf + sc story.pdf

C K Gangadharan Vs CIT, Cochin (Dated: July 21, 2008)

Income Tax - merely because in some cases the revenue has not preferred appeal that does not operate as a bar for the revenue to prefer an appeal in another case where there is just cause for doing so or it is in public interest to do so or for a pronouncement by the higher Court when divergent views are expressed by the Tribunals or the High Courts.:SUPREME COURT;( Larger Bench )

2008-TIOL-333-ITAT-HYD.pdf

Oil Country Tubular Ltd Vs ACIT, Hyderabad ( Dated : May 30, 2008 )

Exchange rate fluctuation has to be allowed as revenue expenditure; admittedly, the receipts were treated as revenue receipts in the hands of the assessee in respect of services to be rendered in future, the exchange rate fluctuation has to be allowed as revenue expenditure. Following the earlier order, we allow the ground of the assessee.

No notional interest on funds advanced to the sister concerns ; the funds advanced to the sister concerns were for business purposes and that they were not used for any personal purposes. Accordingly, there was no justification to compute notional interest. : HYDERABAD ITAT;

2008-TIOL-332-ITAT-MAD.pdf

M/s ITI Capital Markets Limited Vs ACIT, Chennai ( Dated : January 18, 2008 )

Assessee was engaged in the business of selling mutual funds and received brokerage and commission for the same, it decided to acquire the custody undertaking of SIDS. The said custody undertaking was running various schemes of M/s. Pioneer ITI Mutual Fund. For the acquisition of the custody undertaking agreement between SIDS and assessee was draftee on stamp paper No. 267 dated 19.12.2000 and 269 dated 19.12.2000. in the paper it was marked as “TII Capital Markets Ltd.” and in the second paper it is marked as “ITI Capital Markets Ltd”- In order to verify the genuineness of the stamp paper AO sought information from the District Registrar - Assessee did not furnish any information to demonstrate that the stamp papers was purchased on the date they have been purported to have been purchased and the AO inferred that the agreement was not actually entered into on the dated mentioned in the agreement – thereafter a tripartite agreement was executed among SIDS, Deutsche Bank AG and the assessee by which the custodial business being carried on by SIDS was transfereed to Deutsche Bank for consideration of Rs. 1.5 crores.

Held, the assessee did incur cost in purchasing the stamp paper and in preparing the Memorandum of Understanding, thus it cannot be said that the asessee did acquire rights without paying any cost for the same. There should be consideration for the said promise to turn a promise into a contract. The assessee's contention that MOU was executed bereft of consideration is not correct. If there is no consideration paid for the promise, assessee cannot acquire any right. Without consideration it is only a nude pact which cannot be enforced in the court of law. Assessee did not adduce any documentary evidence to demonstrate the validity of the MOU.

Held,that it was the transfer of capital asset and as such eligible to capital gains tax. :CHENNAI ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-1172-CESTAT-DEL.pdf + moser baer story.pdf

M/s Moser Baer India Ltd Vs CCE, Noida (Dated: May 21, 2008)

Central Excise – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit – demand of Special Additional Duty on DTA clearances under the proviso to Notification 23/2003 CE on the ground that the domestic clearances are exempt from VAT/Sales tax – prima facie case in favour of the assessee as per the earlier order of the Tribunal in identical case. : DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1171-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + telecom story.pdf

CCE, Goa Vs Surana Telecom Ltd (Dated: June 11, 2008)

Commissioner(Appeals) does not have the power of remand – he lost it by the Finance Act, 2001, says Tribunal.

SC decision in Mil India 2007-TIOL-30-SC-CX and P&H decision in Dhillon Kool Drinks and Beverages Ltd. 2007-TIOL-524-HC-P&H-CX relied upon.: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1170-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Plas Pack Industries Vs CCE, Ahmedabad III (Dated: March 20, 2008)

Appellants discharged duty on tape in cash on insistence of Revenue arising out of classification dispute, though they were entitled to pay out of modvat credit – Refund of duty allowed -  Interest denied - Whether appellant entitled for interest – Issue goes to Third Member: AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1169-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s PML Indus Ltd Vs CCE, Chandigarh (Dated: May 19, 2008)

100% EOU – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - valuation – goods cleared in DTA by paying 30% of the aggregate duties of customs under notification 13/98 CE – the value has to be arrived under the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act, but not under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act –prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit. : DELHI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-1167-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Sharvin Vs CCE, Bhopal (Dated: June 20, 2008)

ST - Outdoor catering service - Penalty - Since assessee had bona fide belief that they were not covered under the notified service, it is a fit case for invocation of Sec 80 : DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1166-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CST, Faridabad Vs M/s Goetze (India) Ltd (Dated: June 6, 2008)

ST - Management Consultancy Service - Assessee provides services like purchase orders, issuing appointment letters and maintaining books of account of sister concerns which in turn make payments - Such services are not covered under the notified service - Revenue's appeal dismissed : DELHI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

ctariff08_089.pdf

Govt imposes anti-dumping duty on DVD-R & DVD-RW;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-1168-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

CCE, Mumbai Vs Munjal Showa Ltd (Dated: May 12, 2008)

Customs – valuation – inclusion of royalty in the value of the goods imported - the royalty payable is in connection with the manufacturing process and not in connection with import of the goods and the value thereof not to be added to the goods imported – no merit in appeal. :MUMBAI CESTAT;