Chennai Airport Customs seizes Euro 15500 + USD 39700 + British Pound 16200 from Singapore resident; Total seizure of FC so far this year crosses Rs 16 Cr;

Govt may opt for 30% cess on big diesel cars;

DRI arrests 80 year old man with six kgs of heroin (See 'DDT')

Govt likely to move motion in Parliament to remove Calcutta HC Chief Justice on charges of 'misconduct'; Law Minister confirms his ministry examining CJI's recommendation

A comprehensive compilation on Transfer Pricing (See 'Book Review' at bottom of Home Page')

MoF mulling proposal to set up a separate market development agency;

ddt 8 sept.pdf

Anti Dumping Duty on Hydrogen Peroxide;

satellite top.pdf

Long arm of Income Tax reaches skies - Transponder fits into category of 'equipment royalty'; Revenue differs with ITAT on concept of 'secret process' ;

guest column.pdf

TDS on Service Tax: Differential treatment under different sections;

book_itp.pdf

A comprehensive compilation on TP;

office memorandum.pdf

Pay Commission recommendations: Govt notifies revision of rate for training and sumptuary allowances;

Savings Scheme Notification

Govt notifies second amendment to Post Office Savings Rules;

mbuzz946.pdf

Health Ministry organising Advocacy Workshop on tobacco controls tomorrow;

2008-TIOL-442-HC-DEL-IT.pdf + belief story.pdf

CIT, Delhi-XI Vs Batra Bhatta Company ( Dated: August 8, 2008 )

Re-assessment: once the assessment has been completed, the Assessing Officer can frame a fresh assessment only after complying with the conditions laid down in sections 147 and 148 of the said Act. Jurisdiction under Sections 147 and 148 of the said Act can be assumed only after recording reasons. Considering the reasons recorded in the present case, it seems that at the time of recording of the reasons on 30.03.2000, the Assessing Officer had no information in his possession and did not have any material to form a belief that the land sold by the assessee was not agricultural land. The Assessing Officer merely wanted to verify the claim of the assessee and that is why it is noted in the reasons recorded that the claim of assessee that the land is agricultural and hence not a capital asset requires much deeper scrutiny. A mere desire for making a further enquiry does not confer jurisdiction upon the Assessing Officer for re- assessment

Belief per se is not the pre-condition; Merely because the Assessing Officer felt that the issue required much deeper scrutiny, is not ground enough for invoking Section 147. It is not belief per se that is a pre-condition for invoking Section 147 of the said Act but a belief founded on reasons. The expression used in Section 147 is ‘If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe' and not if the Assessing Officer believes. There must be some basis upon which the belief can be built. It does not matter whether the belief is ultimately proved right or wrong, but, there must be some material upon which such a belief can be founded:DELHI HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-441-HC-MUM-IT.pdf

CIT, Mumbai Vs Shri Amol Narendra Dalal ( Dated: August 20, 2008 )

Income Tax - Assessee is a cable operator - transfer his clientele and sells his entire business to another company for a price under an agreement - signs second agreement against a non-compete fee - Assessee offers receipt under first agreement as long-term capital gains but treats the income under second agreement as capital receipt - Revenue treats both as capital gains - Tribunal sets aside the order - Held, since the assessee has given an undertaking that it would not undertake a similar business in future and the transaction between them is not sham, such income cannot be treated as capital gains - Tribunal order upheld and Revenue's appeal dismissed :BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-440-HC-MUM-IT.pdf

Mangla Homes Pvt Ltd Vs ITO ( Dated: August 29, 2008 )

Income Tax - Assessee carries on the business of dealing and investing in properties, flats, warehouses and commercial houses and also ancillary activities like leasing, hire-purchase and renting - buys flats for trading purposes - because of recession leases out flats on rents - claims the same as business income - Revenue treats the same as rental income - CIT(A) and Tribunal hold that rental income cannot be treated as business income - Tribunal's decision upheld and assessee's appeal dismissed:BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2008-TIOL-439-HC-MAD-IT.pdf

CIT, Salem Vs M/s Ideal Garden Complex Private Ltd ( Dated: August 19, 2008 )

Income Tax - Tax effect - CBDT circular - In the light of decisions of this court the uniform line of judicial opinion is that if the tax effect is less than what is stated in the circular, the Revenue need not agitate the issue in appeal and that the circular is binding on the Revenue. Revenue's appeal dismissed: MADRAS HIGH COURT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-1460-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s BPL Engineering Ltd Vs CCE, Bangalore (Dated: May 13, 2008)

Central Excise - Letter of rejection issued through subordinate officers violates principles of natural justice – Assessee to be heard in person to decide the issue of transfer of CENVAT balance - Commissioner to pass a speaking order after following principles of natural justice : BANGALORE CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1459-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CCE, Coimbatore Vs M/s Everwin Textile Mill Ltd (Dated: June 24, 2008)

Central Excise – MODVAT credit on capital goods – delay in filing the declaration under Rule 57T has to be computed from the date of registration with the department – though the capital goods were received prior to the date of registration, the premises are considered as factory only when the excisable goods are manufactured. :CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1458-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CCE, Trichy Vs Larsen & Toubro Limited (Dated: June 24, 2008)

Central Excise – towers manufactured and cleared under exemption Notification 205/88-CE – the exemption is available only for the goods cleared as parts of windmills under SH 8412.90 of the Central Excise Tariff – the towers manufactured by the assessee are not part of windmills, but are iron or steel structures falling under SH 7308.20 – exemption not available.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-1464-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + ship story.pdf

M/s Western India Shipyard Ltd Vs CCE & ST, Goa (Dated: June 24, 2008)

Rupees Seven crore demand of Service Tax goes out of the harbour – Ship Repair services not Port Services

Issue no longer res integra – matter squarely covered by Tribunal decision in Homa Engineering Works 2007-TIOL-769-CESTAT-MUM : MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1463-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Jayaswal Travels Vs CCE, Meerut-I (Dated: July 3, 2008)

ST - Tour operator service - Assessee issued SCN for rent-a-cab servcie - Adjudicating authority confirms demand for tour operator service - Reviewing authority confirms it - Since the tour operator service is beyond the scope of SCN, and otherwise also the assessee did not have tourist vehicles as per requirements, the demand is not sustainable : DELHI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2008-TIOL-1462-CESTAT-BANG.pdf + adarsh story.pdf

M/s Adarsh Realty & Hotels Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Bangalore (Dated: May 30, 2008)

Import of goods from China – When the certificate of origin clearly mentions that the goods are porcelain tiles, there is no need to re-classify them – Evidence of clear mis-declaration of the goods - Anti-dumping duty leviable : BANGALORE CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1461-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Eastern Granites Limited Vs CC & CE, Guntur (Dated: May 27, 2008)

Customs - Failure to fulfill export obligation – Revenue proceeds to recover duty foregone – Tribunal orders pre-deposit – For noncompliance appeal dismissed – Development Commissioner extends time for export obligation – ROA allowed – case remanded to original authority to initiate action only after expiry of extension of time for export obligation : BANGALORE CESTAT;