|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
RBI Clarification on phasing out of Banknotes – no phase out of smaller denomination notes (See 'DDT') Lawyers can advertise in web now (See 'DDT') Cabinet gives nod to introduction of Companies Bill, 2008 in Parliament ; Cabinet grants extension to Second Administrative Reforms Commission; Indian Economy slows down; GDP grows by 7.9% in first quarter India-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement talks concluded; to be operational from Jan, 2009; Duty to be reduced to zero over six years on 4000 items ; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Sending the following files: |
||
|
 |
 |
|
|
CBEC notifies exchange rates for September 2008; Bangalore Cestat decision on service tax liability of developers - A shade of sharp opinion! Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 – Import of Platinum / Palladium / Rhodium / Silver; Cabinet gives nod to introduction of Companies Bill, 2008 in Parliament; Amendments to Airports Regulatory Authority Bill approved; non-aeronautical services and fuel supply infrastructure also brought under control; Population ageing - Let's care for rights of elderly, says CJ of Delhi HC; |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
| |
2008-TIOL-427-HC-MUM-IT.pdf + hc rbi story.pdf CIT-III, Thane Vs Koodathil Kallyatan ( Dated: July 4, 2008 ) Benefits under RBI's Optional Early Retirement Scheme – eligible for deduction under Section 10 ( 10C ): Thus the scheme expressly or impliedly satisfied all the requirements of the Section as well as the guidelines framed for the purpose of Section 10( 10C ) namely Rule 2BA . It is well-settled that circulars can bind the Income-tax Officer but will not bind the appellate Authority or the Tribunal or the Court or even the assessee: Logic alone will not be determinative of a controversy arising from a taxing statute. Equally, common sense is a stranger and an incompatible partner to the Income-tax Act. It does not concern itself with the principles of morality or ethics. It is concerned with the very limited question as to whether the amount brought to tax constitutes the income of the assessee. It is equally settled law that if the language is plain and unambiguous, one can only look fairly at the language used and interpret it to give effect to the legislative intention. Nevertheless, tax laws have to be interpreted reasonably and in consonance with justice adopting a purposive approach.: BOMBAY HIGH COURT; Shree Nirmal Commercial Ltd Vs CIT, Bombay ( Dated: August 7, 2008 ) Income Tax - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Assessee files nil return - AO adds back cash credits shown in the return as undisclosed income - Lapse of time - Assessee asked to produce persons advancing loans - Assessee fails to do it - Penalty imposed - Since even afer makign additions, there is a loss, penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) cannot be imposed besides, the assessee was not given any opportunity to cross-examine persons who denied giving him loans - Assessee's appeal allowed : BOMBAY HIGH COURT; CIT, Chennai Vs M/s Nexus Computer Pvt Ltd ( Dated: August 18, 2008 ) Income Tax - Assessee claims deduction u/s 43B for PF and ESI contribution - AO disallows as the payments were made belatedly - Tribunal allows it - Since the payments were made before filing of the return, they are admissible deduction u/s 43B - Revenue's appeal dismissed: MADRAS HIGH COURT; CIT, New Delhi Vs Hotline Teletube And Components Ltd ( Dated: August 11, 2008 ) Income Tax - Diminution in value of stock - Assessee makes black and white picture tubes for Black & White TV sets - carries stocks for three years and then writes off the same as it had become obsolete - Revenue disallows and CIT(A) agrees - Tribunal allows the appeal - it is established practice of accountancy that the stock can be valued either at cost or market price whichever is lower at the closing stage and a loss can always be anticipated if the stock has become obsolete - since selling the same as scrap would have cost more in terms of excise duty, it was prudent on part of the assessee to write off the stock - loss is allowable - Revenue's appeal dismissed:DELHI HIGH COURT; ACIT, Mumbai Vs Bright Star Investment Pvt Ltd ( Dated : July 02, 2008 ) Income Tax - Sec 45(2) - Capital gains - Assessee converts stock-in-trade into investment and sells the shares - offers long-term capital gains - AO treats it as business income till the date of conversion of shares from stock-in-trade to investment and thereafter as long-term capital gain - CIT(A) disagrees - Since the Sec 45(2) deals with conversion of investment into stock-in-trade and not conversion of stock-in-trade into investment there are only two ways in which the situation can be dealt - one is the way the AO has treated it and the other is the way the assessee has done it - Since it is settled law that when the law does not deal with a specific situation, and there are two different solutions to it, the one which is favourable to the assessee should be accepted - Revenue's appeal dismissed :MUMBAI ITAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
NOTIFICATION Amends 14/2002 to amend Sl No 69 & 71 of Table II in Column (3); Export of paan masala - rebate of duty; CASE LAWS M/s TVS Motor Company Ltd Vs CCE, Chennai (Dated: April 21, 2008) Central Excise – valuation – expenses incurred by the dealers on account of sale promotion of vehicles is not includable in the assessable value.:CHENNAI CESTAT; M/s BHEL Vs CCE, Trichy (Dated: May 1, 2008) Central Excise – valuation – provisional assessment – boilers and other equipments supplied for erection of power plant - finalization of assessment by excluding the Electro Static Precipitators (ESP) on the ground that the buyer had claimed refund of excess duty in not acceptable – matter remanded to finalise the assessments without excluding the ESP - claim for refund of duty can arise out of finalization of provisional assessment, finalization of provisional assessment cannot depend on any refund of duty.:CHENNAI CESTAT; IBM Global Services India (P) Ltd Vs CCE, Pondicherry (Dated: June 20, 2008) Central Excise – CENVAT Credit – amount paid under Rule 6(3)(b) of the CENVAT Credit Rules recovered from the buyers – since the amount collected was already deposited with the Government, Section 11 D has no application.:CHENNAI CESTAT;
SERVICE TAX SECTION 2008-TIOL-158-SC-VAT.pdf + L&Tstory.pdf State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Larsen & Toubro Ltd (Dated: August 26, 2008) What is a Works Contract? A contract of work, i.e., "works contract" involves transfer of property and also element of service or work rendered. That is why it is called composite contract. Works contracts can be of two types only:
No two transactions in property in sub contracting: even if there is no privity of contract between the contractee and the sub-contractor that would not do away the principle of transfer of property by the sub-contractor by employing the same on the property belonging to the contractee. This reasoning is based on the principle of accretion of property in goods. It is subject to the contract to the contrary. Thus in such a case, the work executed by a sub-contractor, results in a single transaction and not multiple transactions. This reasoning is also borne out by Section 4(7) which refers to value of goods at the time of incorporation in the works executed. If the argument of the Department is to be accepted, it would result in plurality of deemed sales which would be contrary to Article 366( 29A )( b) of the Constitution as held by the impugned judgment of the High Court. Moreover, it may result in double taxation which may make the said 2005 Act vulnerable to challenge as violative of Articles 14, (1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India as held by the High Court in its impugned judgment.: SUPREME COURT; 2008-TIOL-1410-CESTAT-BANG.pdf + food story.pdf M/s LSG Sky Chefs (India) Pvt Ltd Vs CST, Bangalore (Dated: April 29, 2008) Appellant engaged in wrapping / handling of food, loading and transportation of food trolleys, storage, handling and setup of catering equipment, storage and handling of dry stores other recycling items and cleaning of equipment, handling of waste, cabin service and laundry services – Registered under the category of Outdoor Caterer's service and discharged service tax – Dispute with regard to levy of service tax on value of food/meal/beverage supplies to Airlines - Availment of a benefit of Notification under Service tax is the option of the assessee - When the actual cost of food and beverage is available, there is no need for paying service tax for the amounts received on account of their sale especially when sales tax has also been paid - No Suppression of facts is found, to invoke longer period – Pre-deposit waived and stay granted - CESTAT:BANGALORE CESTAT; M/s IDEA Cellular Limited Vs CCE, Rohtak (Dated: July 21, 2008) ST - Cenvat credit - Assessee avails credit on input services, capital goods and also of tax paid on services mentioned under rule 6(5) - Revenue is for importing restriction encapsuled under rule 6(3) for credit available even under rule 6(4) and 6(5) - Prima facie the assessee has made a strong case that the restrictions under rule 6(3) cannot be imported to other rules - Stay of recovery granted:DELHI CESTAT; 2008-TIOL-1408-CESTAT-DEL.pdfM/s Shubhlabh Agency Vs CCE, Bhopal (Dated: July 7, 2008) ST-C & F Service - Commission agents are not covered under the taxable service:DELHI CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION 2008-TIOL-1407-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + drawback story.pdf M/s Amritlal Chemaux Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Mumbai (Dated: July 25, 2008) Erroneous drawback – whether appeal concerning redemption fine on goods exported hit by s 129A(1) of Customs Act – ROM application against Tribunal order rejecting appeal also dismissed :MUMBAI CESTAT; Shri B Gopinath Vs CC, Trichy (Dated: March 14, 2008) Customs – confiscated silver bars ordered to be returned to the appellant consequent to the setting aside of the confiscation by the Tribunal – Since the goods were already disposed by the revenue, revenue is directed to pay the appellant the present market value of the goods as on the date of seizure with interest.: CHENNAI CESTAT; |
|
||
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. |
