DGFT restricts import of tiles/slabs + lays down procedure for reimbursement of CST on supplies made to EoUs, EHTP and STP (See 'DDT')

Are co-loaders who provide services to courier agency liable to pay service tax? (See 'DDT')

FAPCCI to host Open House on Customs, Excise and Service Tax tomorrow

US financial crisis not to amount to any crisis for India: PM's Economic Advisory Council;

Cabinet gives nod to amend Explosives Act to regulate ammonium nitrate trade ;

Govt mulling proposal to set up Water Tariff Regulatory Authority;

RBI advises Lehman Brothers' primary dealer not to declare any interim dividend;

ddt 19 Sept.pdf + cbdt_press_release.pdf

DGFT restricts import of tiles/slabs;

editorial.pdf

Referendum: A new tool for dispute management by India Inc; Let's welcome it;

RBI Notifi For NRE Deposits.pdf

Foreign Currency (Non-Resident) Accounts (Banks) Scheme;

RBI Notifi For Interest Rate.pdf

Interest Rate on FCNR(B) Deposits;

mbuzz982.pdf

Govt to commission studies to identify jobs overseas for Indians and impart training ;

mbuzz981.pdf

FAPCCI to host Open House on Customs, Excise and Service Tax tomorrow;

mbuzz980.pdf

National Do No Call Registry: TRAI proposes amendment to tighten rules;

cbdtorder130_2008.pdf

CBDT issues transfer order of 35 CITs;

cbdtorderbihar.pdf

CBDT extends last date for return-filing & tax audit report u/s 44AB due on Sept 30 to Nov 30 for Bihar;

cbdtorderj&k.pdf

Individual return filing last date due on July 31 extended to Sept 30 for J&K;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-174-SC-IT.pdf + sc it story.pdf

CIT, Madras Vs M/s Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd (Dated: September 16, 2008)

Income Tax - Incentive subsidy received by Sugar Mills was Capital Receipt and not Revenue Receipt : The test is that the character of the receipt in the hands of the assessee has to be determined with respect to the purpose for which the subsidy is given. In other words, in such cases, one has to apply the purpose test. The point of time at which the subsidy is paid is not relevant. The source is immaterial. The form of subsidy is immaterial. The main eligibility condition in the scheme in this case is that the incentive must be utilized for repayment of loans taken by the assessee to set up new units or for substantial expansion of existing units. On this aspect there is no dispute. If the object of the subsidy scheme was to enable the assessee to run the business more profitably then the receipt is on revenue account. On the other hand, if the object of the assistance under the subsidy scheme was to enable the assessee to set up a new unit or to expand the existing unit then the receipt of the subsidy was on capital account. Therefore, it is the object for which the subsidy/assistance is given which determines the nature of the incentive subsidy. The form of the mechanism through which the subsidy is given is irrelevant.: SUPREME COURT;

2008-TIOL-433-ITAT-DEL.pdf

DCIT, New Delhi Vs Roxy Investments Pvt Ltd ( Dated : June 13, 2008 )

Income Tax -  deduction claimed under section 10B for the purpose of book profit under section 115JB - Held, Explanation to section 115JB provides the manner of computation of book profit. The starting point is the book profit as disclosed in the profit and loss account prepared in accordance with Parts II and III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956. Such profit is subject to adjustments specified in the Explanation to the said section. In terms of Explanation (ii) to section 115JB. The amount of income to which provisions, inter alia , of section 10A/10B apply if such amount is credited to profit and loss account, is to be reduced from the profit as per profit and loss account. The amount of income which can be reduced by the AO for computing the book profit under that clause will be the amount which is credited to the Profit & Loss Account and not the amount of income which is claimed by the assessee or determined by the AO while assessing the income under the regular provisions of the Act as  supported by the decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Moser Baer India Ltd. Revenue appeal dismissed. :DELHI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-432-ITAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Hi-Tech Gears Ltd Vs DCIT, New Delhi ( Dated : August 8, 2008 )

Income Tax - Deduction claimed for software expenses - AO treats it as capital expenditure - CIT(A) treats software and computer expenses as capital expenditure entitled to depreciation at full rate instead of half rate i.e. @ 60% instead of 25% as allowed by the AO - Held, In light of decision of Tribunal's Special Bench decision ( 2008-TIOL-97-ITAT-DEL-SB ) in the case of Amway, the CIT (A) order set aside and the issue remanded to the AO for deciding the same afresh:DELHI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-431-ITAT-MUM.pdf

ACIT, Vs EPSOM Shipping (I) Pvt Ltd ( Dated : July 03, 2008 )

Income Tax- Assessee is a shipping company - acquires ship and opts for tonnage scheme u/s 115VP of the Act – AO rejects the claim on the ground that the assessee has given the ship on bare boat charter hire basis to a company which has in turn given the same on charter hire basis for a period of six months to another company, which is not an Indian company - CIT(A) held that the assessee has produced enough evidence to show that it has been pursuing the matter even from the time of its acquiring the qualifying ship and the delay in obtaining the tonnage tax certificate has occasioned due to the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and was satisfied that the conditions prescribed under section 115VP were complied with - Held, in the light of decisions of various High Court s CIT(A) cannot be said to be at fault. Section 115VP itself finds place in the matter of procedures. The assessee has only applied for option under tonnage scheme. The application filed by the assessee, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case has rightly been directed to be considered under Chapter XIIG of the Act. Revenue's appeal dismissed.:MUMBAI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-430-ITAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Cebon India Limited Vs ACIT, Faridabad ( Dated : June 27, 2008 )

Income Tax - Assessee alleges that notice u/s 143(2) not served in time and, therefore, the assessment order is null and void - AO claims that the notice has been dispatched before expiry of limitation - CIT(A) held that the assessee had been given sufficient opportunities of being heard - Held, no evidence on record to suggest that notice was served through the proper channel or through Registered Post as per the provisions of the General Clauses Act, 1897. Hence no notice served on assessee.

As in respect of provisions contained in Section 292BB which came into force w.e.f .01.04.2008 - Held, it will apply to the proceedings of the assessment year 2008-09 and subsequent years and not to any earlier year :DELHI ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-1529-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + sec 4a story.pdf

Crystal Paints Vs CCE, Mumbai-V (Dated: July 21 ,2008)

Valuation of Sec 4A notified goods paints manufactured on jobwork - 200 litre bulk drums correctly assessed u/s 4 on basis of formula laid down in Ujagar Prints case - Tribunal allows appeal :MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1528-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s UCAL Fuel Systems Ltd Vs CCE, Chennai-III (Dated: June 20 ,2008)

Central Excise – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit – demand of interest on irregular CENVAT Credit reversed on their own by the assessee – limitation applies to demand of interest also – demand clearly time barred – pre-deposit waived.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1527-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CCE, Coimbatore Vs M/s Ponds (India) Ltd, Nilgiris (Dated: July 17 ,2008)

100% EOUs – demand of duty on polythene pouches procured duty free under Notification 1/95 CE and used for packing fresh mushroom cleared in DTA – Revenue failed to produce documentary evidence to substantiate claim that the permission by the Development Commissioner for DTA sale did not cover fresh mushroom – Revenue appeal dismissed.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-1532-CESTAT-DEL.pdf + tour story.pdf

M/s Mangalwardhini Travels Vs CCE , Bhopal (Dated: July 30 ,2008)

Tour operators using vehicles as stage carriages – still liable to pay Service tax as tour operator – notwithstanding the Appellant's claim that they are running their vehicles as stage carriages, since the Regional Transport Authority has issued tourist permits in respect of their vehicles, under the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, the same have to be treated as Tourist Vehicles and the Appellants have to be treated as Tour Operators under Section 65(52) of the Act.

Since Government has issued Section 11C notification, no suppression can be alleged and no extended period can be invoked: - Since the Government itself in this notification has acknowledged the practice of non-levy of service tax during period from 1.4.2000 to 4.2.04 on the service provided by tour operators operating under Contract Carriage permits, in relation to transport of passengers from one place to another (other than package tour services) there will be no justification for holding the Appellant guilty of wilful suppression of relevant information with intent to evade the service tax. So, longer limitation period cannot be invoked and the entire demand is time barred.:DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1531-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s N Rajashekar & Co Vs CCE, Mysore (Dated: July 4 ,2008)

Service Tax - breaking and crushing of limestone boulders into jelly and their transportation; not cargo handling service: The main purpose of contract was that of breaking and crushing of limestone boulders into jelly of the required sizes. The essential characteristics of the work of the process was not that of “cargo handling services ” but that of breaking and crushing of limestone boulders into jelly and their transportation. The definition of “Cargo” in terms of Concise Oxford English Dictionary is goods carried out commercially on ship, aircraft or truck. Normally in trade it refers to transporting, doing the function of shipping the goods in packed or unpacked conditions and handling the goods only in the present case, the assessee is not handling the goods by loading the same from one place to unloading it at another place. The essential characteristics of the appellant's activity was breaking/crushing of limestone boulders into jelly and incidentally handling over to SAIL.: BANGALORE CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1530-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CCE, Salem Vs Salem District Co-Operative Milk Producers Union Ltd (Dated: July 21 ,2008)

Service tax – Goods Transport Operator service – demand for the period 16.11.1997 to 1.6.1998 – demand of service tax is sustained but penalties vacated.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

ctariff08_105.pdf

Anti-dumping duty levied on import of Maleic Anhydride from China;

dgft08not042.pdf

Export by DTA units to SEZ in freely convertible currency: DGFT allows policy to allow credit; to allow DEPB benefits in case of exports against rupee payment;

dgft08not041.pdf

DGFT restricts import of tiles/slabs;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-173-SC-CUS.pdf + cus story.pdf

M/s Panacea Biotec Ltd Vs CC, New Delhi (Dated: August 6, 2008)

Customs Valuation – includability of Design engineering separately assessed in the value fermentors – Tribunal had not considered the points raised by the assessee - matter remanded:SUPREME COURT;

2008-TIOL-1526-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s EM PEE BEE International Vs CCE & CC, Chennai (Dated: June 17 ,2008)

Customs – Stay / Dispensation of pre-deposit - under-valuation of apples - Prima facie, the enhancement of value of the goods based on the prices mentioned in the computer printouts, which prices were accepted to be the correct prices by the importer, is sustainable in law – pre-deposit ordered. :CHENNAI CESTAT;