Ripple effect of global recession: Exports down by 12 % in October; Imports grows by 10.6%;

Four NSG hubs to be set up; steps being taken to beef up maritime security: PM;

New Home Minister expects good growth despite global recession;

CBDT amends Industrial Park Scheme, 2008

DDT is a handy tool to remove cobwebs in mind: Justice Sudhakar (See 'Common Basket');

Homage to Hemant Karkare by a former colleague (See 'DDT');

ddt 1 Dec.pdf

DDT 1000 – Grand celebration in Chennai + Chidambaram at home – Too little too late;

tiol top report.pdf

DDT is a handy tool to remove cobwebs in mind: Justice Sudhakar;

guest.pdf

Change for the good - hopefully! It's also time for invoking Rule 56J!;

RBI Notifi For NBFCs.pdf

Review of Prudential Norms – Provisioning for Standard Assets and Risk Weights for Exposures to Commercial Real Estate and NBFCs;

Vacancies_intel.pdf

Delhi DRI looking for IOs;

mbuzz1215.pdf

TRAI releases paper on quality of Cable TV service in non-CAS areas and DTH service;

mbuzz1214.pdf

India's exports grows by 12% in Oct; Cumulative growth between Apr-Oct is 23.7%;

mbuzz1213.pdf

Heads of Missions recommends launch of Indian Community Welfare Fund;

mbuzz1212.pdf

Four NSG hubs to be set up; steps being taken to beef up maritime security: PM;

NOTIFICATION

it08not106.pdf

CBDT amends Industrial Park Scheme, 2008

2008-TIOL-597-ITAT-BANG.pdf + Century Galaxy story.pdf

M/s Century Galaxy Developers Ltd Vs ACIT, Bangalore (Dated : October 08, 2008)

Income tax – When undivided right and interest in property is owned by shareholders irrevocably and perpetually company cannot claim ownership and consequently depreciation u/s 32 not allowable

For the purpose of section 32 of the Act, it is the person who has paid the price of the asset, has been placed in possession of the asset and is using the asset for the purpose of his business in his own right who can be granted the depreciation allowance. These conditions cannot be said to have been fulfilled by the assessee-company. It may, if at all and that too only arguably, have only the husk or the shell of ownership in the sense that a formal deed of conveyance, duly registered, has not been executed in favour of the shareholders or members to whom the units have been allotted. On the other hand, the documentation shows unmistakably that it is the shareholders or members of the company who are in actual possession of the units allotted to them and have paid the purchase price for the units. Therefore, only they can be considered as owners of the units and not the assessee company: BANGALORE ITAT;

2008-TIOL-596-ITAT-DEL.pdf

ACIT, New Delhi Vs M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd (Dated : August 14, 2008)

Unexplained cash found during search – Addition deleted since source stands explained.

During the course of search, sum of Rs. 75.85 lakhs was found in the safe kept in the office premises of assessee. On examination, cashier of group concerns stated that sum of Rs. 16 lakhs belong to assessee and are reflected in its cash book. Regarding the balance it was stated that sum of Rs. 63 lakhs was withdrawn by a group concern from Syndicate bank and handed over to him by the accountant of that concern.

AO noticed that the sister concern is not maintaining any books of accounts and the claim of such cash withdrawal from bank is not recorded anywhere and further the currency does not bear slips of Syndicate bank from where assessee claims to have drawn money on the previous day. Hence the sum of Rs. 59.82 lakhs was treated as unexplained cash. However CIT(A) deleted the addition and ITAT confirmed this order.

Appeal by revenue dismissed: DELHI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-595-ITAT-DEL.pdf

SRF Limited Vs DCIT, New Delhi ( Dated : October 31, 2008 )

Income tax - deferred tax liability - assessee argues deferred tax is not covered by the definition of 'tax' given in Sec 2(43) - further argues that its expenses are computed as per Accounting Standards-22 and there is no provision in the Act which talks about its computation - AO disagrees on the ground that deferred tax liability is nothing but deferral of income tax on account of timing difference due to depreciation which does not impact book proft u/s 115JB and adds back the sum - Held, in view of insertion of clause (c) to explanation of Sec 115JB by the Finance Act, 2008, there is no infirmity in the Revenue's view

Assessee withdraws cash of Rs 60,000 to clear electricity bill - Since the cash was deposited in a bank to pay the bill, it is not to be disallowed under Rule 6DD

Assessee takes membership to a Golf Club - AO allows the membership fee but disallows the expenditure related to holding a tournament - Held, since the membership of the club was allowed, other expenses cannot be disallowed as they are consequential and for business purposes: DELHI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-594-ITAT-MAD.pdf

Sword Global (I) (P) Ltd Vs ITO, Chennai ( Dated : January 04, 2008 )

Income tax - exemption u/s 10B - assessee first claims deduction u/s 10B and then claims set off of carry forward loss against the balanced taxable income - AO takes the view that the carry forward loss is to be set off first against the total income and then Sec 10B deduction to be claimed - CIT(A) agrees with the AO - Held, the quantum of deduction under section 10B(1) is required to be computed with reference to the profits derived from the export of articles or things. The said profits are required to be first computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act and only then the net profits are required to be considered for working out the proportion of the eligible amount. There is no justification in the assessee's argument that the second proviso to sec. 10B has to be applied directly and immediately on the gross business profit before taking into consideration the brought forward unabsorbed business losses. If this procedure of computation is adopted, it will result in absurd results because 10% of taxable income gets worked out even before considering the set off of brought forward losses against the business profits. CIT(A) order upheld - Assessee's appeal dismissed: CHENNAI ITAT;

2008-TIOL-593-ITAT-MUM.pdf

ITO, Mumbai Vs Tanu Health Care Ltd ( Dated : October 30, 2008 )

Income Tax - Assessee, trading in shares, discloses closing stock (Shares) partly at cost price and partly at market price, thereby claiming speculative loss - Since the same issue was held by a special bench in an earlier case, CIT(A) order upheld - Held, deduction u/s 43B of the amount paid towards contribution fund beyond the due dates benefit of payments made within the time allowed for filing of the return is not applicable in respect of employees contribution - With respect to employer's contribution, considering the amendment of Section 43B, it was held disallowed - Appeal of the revenue partly allowed: MUMBAI ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-220-SC-CX-LB.pdf + sc story.pdf

CCE, Bangalore Vs Srikumar Agencies ( Dated: November 27, 2008 )

Central Excise – Classification – Printing whether merely incidental or primary - Judges interpret statutes, they do not interpret judgments. They interpret words of statutes; their words are not to be interpreted as statutes. – matter remanded: In the present case, since the factual position has not been analysed in detail, disposal of appeals by mere reference to decisions, was not the proper way to deal with the appeals. By clubbing all the cases together and without analyzing the special features of each case disposing of the appeals in the manner done was not proper. Courts should not place reliance on decisions without discussing as to how the factual situation fits in with the fact situation of the decision on which reliance is placed. Observations of Courts are neither to be read as Euclid's theorems nor as provisions of the statute and that too taken out of their context: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA;

2008-TIOL-1960-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

Shri Renuga Soft X Towels Vs CCE, Madurai (Dated: September 5, 2008)

Central Excise – confiscation and penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules – the impugned goods were only semi-finished goods for the assessee and there is no requirement to maintain an account for semi finished goods under Rule 25 - confiscation and penalty set aside: CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1959-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

CCE, Pune-I Vs M/s Vam Organic Chemicals Ltd (Dated: September 24, 2008)

Central Excise – Valuation – When sale is at factory gate transit insurance in the name of assessee does not make assessee the owner of goods or agent of buyer - Freight and insurance charges not includible in AV – Ratio of Apex Court judgment in Escorts JCB Ltd applicable on all fours – Commissioner's order upheld: : MUMBAI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-1964-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Manan Motors Pvt Ltd Vs CCE (A), Ahemadabad-I (Dated: November 7, 2008)

ST - Installation, erection and commissioning service - Assessee purchases CNG kits and installs the same on motor vehicles - Revenue raises demand on the gross payment received from customers - assessee says the transaction also involves sale of the kit and the same cannot be subjected to tax - prima facie, the tax is leviable only on the fitting charge - waiver from pre-deposit granted: AHEMADABAD CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1963-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE Vadodara-I Vs M/s J K Enterprises (Dated: November 11, 2008)

ST - C & F Service - Assessee renders Del Credre Agent's service and is also a distributor of IPCL - Revenue demands tax under C & F Service - Commissioner(A) finds such a service is not covered under C & F Service - Going by the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in the case of L & T, there is no infirmity in the Commissioner(A) orderL: AHEMADABAD CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1962-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CCE, Chandigarh Vs M/s Rainbow Denim Ltd (Dated: October 23, 2008)

ST - service recipient - assessee is an exporter - avails services of non-resident commission agents - Tax is leviable from 1.1.05 as per Larger Bench decision in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd: DELHI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2008-TIOL-1965-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + epcg story.pdf

Jaiprakash Industries Ltd Vs CC (Import), Nhava Sheva (Dated: October 20, 2008)

EPCG licence for import of ‘new crane' but appellants imported ‘old and used crane' and fudged the import documents – as the goods were meant for the Sardar Sarovar project and the importers would not earn any substantial profit from sale of the crane, fine and penalty reduced by Tribunal.

Tribunal's observations -

The importers appeared to have accepted that the licence covers only new crane as they have not contested the finding that the goods are to be assessed at the normal rate and not at the concessional rate available to EPCG licence clearance and have only challenged the fine and penalty.

Since the charge of mis-declaration is clearly established, confiscation is to be sustained. 

Appeal partly allowed: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-1961-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CC, Jaipur Vs M/s Shri Ram Rayons (Dated: October 7, 2008)

Customs - EPCG scheme - non-fulfilment of export obligation - amendment to notification 28/97 Cus dated April 1, 1997 vide  No. 29/2004-Cus., dated 28-1-2004 is retrospective - matter remanded to the original authority to consider the party's claim that the export obligation had been fulfilled in the light of the revised policy: DELHI CESTAT;