Delhi DRI arrests two pax with 3.75 kg heroin in Amritsar;

Delhi DRI arrests pax heading for Jakarta with 11.25 kg ketamine;

Govt for developing Jharia Coal Field on PPP model;

Signing nuclear deal: India insists it will sign only after President Bush signs it into law;

Holland Govt buys beleaguered banking & insurance major Fortis for 16.8 bn euro;

Cabinet approves proposal ot upgrade 1896 posts;

Inflation down to 11.99%; For primary items it is 11.29%;

Ratan Tata finally says good bye to West Bengal for Nano project;

Rajendra Lodha, inheritor of P Birla's wealth, dies of cardiac arrest;

Violence against Christians: Centre issues strong advisory to Orissa Govt;

chariman story.pdf

We are not against GST – CBEC Chairman Jha;

poll story.pdf

A slew of Cabinet decisions: Congress unfolding roadmap for polls;

Office Memorandum.pdf

Expenditure Management - Economy Measures and Rationalization of Expenditure - Supplementary guidelines related to TA/DA;

HP Story.pdf

Hewlett Packard Customs duty evasion case turns out to be a bonanza for DRI;

mbuzz1031.pdf

Highest Panel of market regulators meet to discuss how safe is India from global turmoil!;

mbuzz1030.pdf

Cabinet approves additional funds for Commonwealth Youth Games;

mbuzz1029.pdf

Cabinet approves proposal to upgrade 1896 posts;

mbuzz1028.pdf

Pay Review Committee of UGC proposes huge hike in pay-scale ;

NOTIFICATION

it08not093.pdf

CBDT notifies Reverse Mortgage Scheme 2008;

INSTRUCTION

instruct0814.pdf

Processing of returns for A.Y. 2007-08 – difficulties being faced in processing ITR-5 return in cities where refund banker scheme is operational – regarding;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-461-ITAT-BANG.pdf

Shri Shailesh Kumar Haran Vs DCIT, Bangalore (Dated: April 25, 2008)

Income Tax - Search u/s 132 - Assessee is into trading of auto parts - Notice to file returns - Undisclosed income declared - tax @ 60% plus surcharge @ 10% - assessee partly pays tax - AO makes addition and levies penalty for not depositing full tax - CIT(A) keeps the penalty to the initial addition made by the AO - Held, penalty is attracted to the returned as well as undisclosed income - Assessee's appeal fails and Revenue's appeal allowed in part: BANGALORE ITAT;

2008-TIOL-460-ITAT-MUM.pdf

ACIT, Mumbai Vs Crisil Ltd ( Dated : April 30, 2008)

Income Tax - software expenses - Revenue treats it as capital in nature - Issue is no longer res integra as it has been decided in favour of the assessee by a Special Bench in the Amway Enterprises case (2008-TIOL-97-ITAT-DEL-SB): MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-459-ITAT-MAD.pdf

B S C Textiles Vs ITO, Tirupur ( Dated : Febuary 26, 2008)

Income Tax - Deduction u/s 80HHC - Assessee earns interest on deposits made with banks for securing export credit - claims it as profits of business - AO disallows - In view of settled laws, interest income has no nexus with exports - Assessee's appeal dismissed: CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-458-ITAT-DEL.pdf

ACIT, New Delhi Vs M/s Saraya Industries Ltd ( Dated : June 30, 2008 )

Disallowance of Interest on diverted funds – Evidence to substantiate availability of interest free funds and commercial expediency not produced before AO- Matter remitted to AO

Disallowance under Sec. 43B – EPF and ESI paid within grace period – No disallowance can be made

Before CIT(A) assessee pleaded that it has sufficient interest free funds and the advance to sister concerns free of interest was made out of such funds. It was also contended that the advances were made fro commercial expediency and that most of the advances were made in earlier years. CIT(A) accepted these contentions and evidences produced by assessee and allowed appeal. On appeal, Tribunal held that powers given to CIT(A) under sec. 250(4) is not cosmetic and it is the duty of CIT(A) in the interest of natural justice to provide opportunity to the AO. Hence the issue remitted to AO. 

Appeal by revenue partly allowed. : DELHI ITAT ;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-1620-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + credit story.pdf

CCE, Pune I Vs M/s Premium Energy Transmission Ltd (Dated: June 5, 2008)

Central Excise - Revenue has not brought on record any evidence that the respondents had availed credit on the inputs which were exclusively used for wind mill gear boxes – no cause for reversal of Cenvat credit when 8% or 10% paid under rule 6 of CCR, 2004: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1615-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CCE, Chennai Vs MEL Systems & Services Ltd (Dated: July 17, 2008)

Central Excise – Small scale exemption – brand name of the foreign company - the exclusive right to use the brand name in India was granted to the respondents by the brandname-owner under an agreement - This grant qualified to be treated as “assignment” for purposes of SSI notifications – appellate authority was right in allowing the exemption.: CHENNAI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-1619-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Morinda Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd Vs CCE, Ludhiana (Dated: September 5, 2008)

ST - storage and warehousing service - assessee is a sugar manufacturer - gets paid by the Central Govt for holding on to stocks which are to be either sold as levy sugar or free sale sugar - payments are made towards storage, insurance and interest - Revenue levies tax on storage and interest - Since the assessee is not providing storage service, prima facie it is not a service - waiver from pre-deposit granted: DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1617-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + revenue story.pdf

CCE, Pune II Vs M/s I J Muthu Foods Pvt Ltd (Dated: August 28, 2008)

Tribunal says that Revenue ought not to have been aggrieved against this remand order of the Commissioner(Appeals).

Commissioner(A) does not have the power of remand – these powers removed w.e.f 11.05.2001 – Order set aside and matter remanded to adjudicating authority. :MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1616-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

CCE, Nagpur Vs Ms Maratha Cement Works (Dated: July 25, 2008)

CENVAT credit – Commr (A) followed earlier CESTAT decisions allowing credit on mobile phone services – Earlier decisions of CESTAT not stayed by High Court – No merit in Revenue's stay application :MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2008-TIOL-1618-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

Dhirendra Sheth Vs CC, Tuticorin (Dated: June 11, 2008)

Customs – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - diversion of polyester fabrics imported under advance licences in local market – the appellants have no prima facie case – pre-deposit ordered: CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1614-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

Sagar Collection Vs CC, Tuticorin (Dated: July 15, 2008)

Customs – misuse of DEEC scheme and diversion of imported goods – the order was passed ex parte and also beyond the scope of show cause notice – matter remanded. : CHENNAI CESTAT;