Breakdown of WTO talks: FIEO Analysis (See 'DDT')

Revenue Board: The vacant space! (See 'DDT')

Today is last day for I-T return-filing; e-returns likely to cross 13 lakh today (See 'Mixed Buzz')

Central Excise Meerut II Commissionerate launches anti-corruption drive; suspends one Supdt in Bareily + one Inspector in Moradabad;

AP High Court stays export duty on clearances to SEZ;

Ad hoc Promotion to Commissioner-level: DoP&T renders a blow to CBEC efforts;

ddt 31 july.pdf

The Vacant Space!

cobweb.pdf

'Gelatin' lurking in air but do we really care?

2008-TIOL-143-SC-CT .pdf + rasna story.pdf

M/s Pioma Industries Vs State of Kerala (Dated: July 25, 2008)

Is Rasna a `beverage' or `non-alcoholic drink'? Matter remanded to Tribunal - the stand taken by the appellants about the article being "beverage" has not been specifically considered by the Assessing Authority, the First appellate Authority, the Tribunal and the High Court. Whether a particular article can be called as a "beverage" has to be factually decided. That analysis has not been done. Similarly, the effect of the introduction of the Entries 124A and 141 with the Assessment year 1999-2000 has not been considered. Therefore, the effect of the change from 1.1.2000 has also not been considered and has not been analysed.: SUPREME COURT;

rbi08cir002.pdf + rbiclarification.pdf

RBI liberalises foreign currency norms for project offices + clarifies deferred tax asset to be treated as intangible asset

mbuzz836.pdf

CCEA gives approval for setting up of four metro blood banks as Centre of Excellence in Transfusion Medicine ;

mbuzz835.pdf

Cabinet gives nod to table fresh Gratuity (Amendment) Bill ;

mbuzz834.pdf

Cabinet extends mandate of Finance Commission to oil, food & fertiliser bonds;

mbuzz833.pdf

Today is last day for I-T return-filing; e-returns likely to cross 13 lakh today;

2008-TIOL-370-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

CIT, Delhi Vs M/s D D Sales Corporation ( Dated: July 22, 2008 )

Income Tax - Search u/s 132 - Bar of limitation u/s 158BE (1)(a) - Assessee pleads the search was concluded on 30/8/1996 and the assessment order passed u/s 158BC on 31/08/1997 is beyond the period of one year prescribed - Tribunal sets aside the order - Since the Tribunal has found that the last panchnama was recorded on 30/8/1996, no fault can be found with the order - Revenue's appeal dismissed : DELHI HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-369-HC-MAD-IT.pdf

CIT, Madras Vs M/s Ashok Leyland Limited ( Dated: July 14, 2008 )

Income Tax - Deduction u/s 37 for expenses incurred on issue of debenture - Revenue disallows - CIT(A) allows it on the ground that it was to meet the working capital requirement - Tribunal upholds the order - Revenue produces no extra evidence - Revenue's appeal dismissed : MADRAS HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-346-ITAT-LKW.pdf + dc story.pdf

ADDL CIT, Kanpur Vs Shri (Dr) D P Agarwal ( Dated : 27 June, 2008 )

Deputy Commissioner becomes Joint Commissioner; No fresh notification for jurisdiction required: this post was a newly constituted post and, therefore, the post of DCIT as mentioned in section 116, merely on the basis of nomenclature, after the amendment cannot be said to be the same post as earlier existed. The effect of this substitution was that all the powers and functions vested in DCIT got vested in JCIT ; no fresh notification was required in view of section 24 of the General Clauses Act and the circular dated 11.10.90 continued to be applicable to the substituted authorities. Viz , JCIT & JDI . continuity of the statutory instrument is preserved if harmony between the statutory instrument and the new law is not affected thereby; no fresh notification was required because, DCIT upto 30.9.98 became the JCIT by virtue of legislative amendment by the Finance ( No.2 ) Act, 1998 and, therefore, all the powers which vested in DCIT automatically got vested in JCIT . No fresh empowerment in this behalf was required. :LUCKNOW ITAT;

2008-TIOL-345-ITAT-DEL.pdf

Asia Aviation Limited Vs DCIT, New Delhi ( Dated : March 20, 2008 )

Assessee claimed provision made for overhauling and hot section inspection of the engine of the air craft as a deduction. According to the assessee overhauling and hot section inspection of the engine of the air craft was mandatory after specific number of flying hours. The assessee therefore estimated its liability in respect of TBO (time between overhauls) and HIS (Hot section inspection) after completion of the requisite flying hours and divided the said liability by the number of hours after completion of which TBO and HIS is mandatory and multiplied the resultant figure by the number of hours the air craft flew during the Previous Year.

Held, it is clear from the provisions of the Air Craft Act and the Air Craft Rules that the assessee had to mandatory carry out TBO and HIS after the air craft flies the required number of hours. In fact it was mandatory for the assessee to incur these expenses. The incurring of the liability by the assessee is a certainty. On facts therefore the liability has crystallized during the Previous Year. Even otherwise the liability in the case of the assessee was a certainty and the estimate of the same on a reasonable basis was possible.

Held further, that expenses do not bring a new asset into existence or do they give the assessee a new or different advantage. The expenditure cannot therefore be said to be a capital expenditure. :DELHI ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-1218-CESTAT-AHM.pdf + yarn story.pdf

M/s Mahesh Texturisers Vs CCE, Surat (Dated: May 9, 2008)

Central Excise - Yarn received for texturising by job workers in cartons bearing Brand name – Texturised yarn cleared in same cartons – Benefit of SSI exemption - Difference of opinion – Tribunal refers matter to Third Member : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1217-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + slab story.pdf

M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd Vs CCE, Nagpur (Dated: November 30, 2008)

Notification 273/88-CE – Eligibility of Exemption to Pre-cast Concrete slabs manufactured at site for covering trenches used to lay Power Cables - no requirement in exemption notification 273/88-CE that goods for which benefit is claimed should be used for construction of building – Tribunal by Majority.

Third Member on reference -

The goods in question viz. concrete slabs undisputedly fall under CET sub-heading 6807.00.

There is also no dispute that they were manufactured at the site of construction of power station which has been accepted by both Members to be a building.

Therefore, the only question remaining for determination is, whether there is a further requirement under the Notification that the goods in dispute should be used for construction of building, as held by the Ld. Member(Judicial).

To my mind, there is no such requirement as the Notification does not stipulate that the goods for which the benefit is claimed should be so used i.e for construction of the building. : MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1216-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Kohinoor Printers Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Pondicherry (Dated: February 13, 2008)

CENVAT credit availed by an assessee is equivalent to excise duty paid – Benefit not deniable under shelter of Notfn 214/86 - Revenue-neutral situation – Assessee entitled to CENVAT credit of duty paid – Apex Court decision in Narmada Chematur followed – Order of the lower authority set aside and appeal allowed : CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1215-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Gujarat Smelting And Refining Co Ltd Vs CCE , Ahmedabad II (Dated: June 9, 2008)

Central Excise – penalty under Section 11 AC – the appellant paid part of the duty with interest before the issue of Show Cause Notice and the rest of the amount after adjudication – no infirmity in the order of Commissioner (Appeals) remanding the case for fresh determination of penalty. : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-1214-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s ITW India Limited Vs CCE & CC, Hyderabad-I (Dated: February 7, 2008)

Service Tax – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit – Cargo Handling Vs Packing Services – the co-ordinate bench at Kolkata has already decided the case against the assessee by classifying the service as Cargo Handling service – pre-deposit ordered. BANGALORE CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1213-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Garibdasji Distributors Vs CCE, Coimbatore (Dated: April 7, 2008)

Consignment agent, who carried out sale of goods on behalf of principal is held to be a ‘C & F' Agent for Service Tax - Held to have rendered “C & F Agent's Service” to their principal inasmuch as they had undertaken clearing and forwarding operations also for and on behalf of the principal - Appeal of the assessee dismissed : CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

M/s Sakata Inx (India) Ltd Vs CC (ICD), New Delhi (Dated: March 11, 2008)

Customs – confiscation of imported Polyurethane Resin as hazardous chemical under Management, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules 1989 - Polyurethane Resin is not listed in the Schedule to the said Rules and the composition of the chemical is not relevant for the said Rules – confiscation set aside. :DELHI CESTAT;