Central Excise Duty reimbursed to Exempted SSI Units - CAG (See 'DDT')

Govt to provide 204 vessels fitted with modern equipment to coastal police stations;

Chennai Airport Customs seizes ornamental fishes from pax coming from Singapore + confisticates 29000 Singaporean dollar from pax heading for Singapore;

Vietnam to cut corporate tax rate; Switzerland plans drastic tax reforms;

Asok Kr Ganguly, R M Lodha and H L Dattu sworn in as new Judges of Supreme Court;

Govt appoints O P S Malik, 1975 batch IPS, as new DG of NCB;

Global steel market rapidly shrinking; prospects for 2009 are too weak: OECD + Steel Ministry for 10% countervailing duty on steel imports;

Centre, States agree for two slabs dual GST system; Combined rate likely to be less than 20%: West Bengal FM;

FDI inflows down by 26% in October;

New laws to tackle terrorism on the cards: Sonia;

Civil Aviation Minister asks Airlines to cut fare;

ddt 17 dec.pdf

Foreign Service Provider and Indian Tax payer – since when? – Latest Bombay High Court Order in TIOL Today

special column.pdf

Clearances to SEZ developers: Clash between DRI and DGCEI - what is good for goose must be good for gander!

rupee_export_rates.pdf

Rupee Export Credit Interest Rates;

mbuzz1270.pdf

Govt to provide 204 vessels fitted with modern equipment to coastal police stations;

mbuzz1269.pdf

Investment by PIOs : Govt regularly monitors and reviews FDI polic, says Minister;

mbuzz1268.pdf

India seeks USD 3 bn additional loan from World Bank;

mbuzz1267.pdf

ICRIER report on retail business: Govt yet to take a view on policy recommendations, says Minister;

mbuzz1266.pdf

Global steel market rapidly shrinking; prospects for 2009 are too weak: OECD;

2008-TIOL-631-HC-RAJ-IT.pdf + storyhc63108.pdf

CIT Vs M/s Sirohi S B V Bank Ltd (Dated: September 24, 2008 )

Income tax - Sec 80P(2)(a)(i) - assessee is a cooperative society - carries on banking activities and credit facilities to its members - earns interest income from loans given to its own employees from PF deposits and housing loans - claims exemption - AO makes additions - CIT(A) allows some appeals and also upholds AO's orders in some cases - Tribunal allows assessee's appeal - Held, since the society is formed for enlarging cooperative movement and to provide banking facilities to its members, its staff cannot be treated as members and therefore, the loans given to them cannot be treated as relatable to banking business. Revenue's appeal allowed :RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT ;

2008-TIOL-630-HC-P-H-IT.pdf

CIT, Ludhiana Vs M/s Arihant Cotsyn Limited (Dated: November 21, 2008 )

Income tax - assessee is a manufacturer - earns commission and service charges - AO holds since the assessee company had no mandate to earn such income, it is to be treated as income from other sources and not business income - held, merely because the assessee is a manufacturer, it cannot be barred from earning income from commission and service charges - Revenue's appeal dismissed: PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT ;

2008-TIOL-629-HC-MAD-IT.pdf

CIT, Tamil Nadu-III, Madras Vs Raj Finlease Ltd (Dated: June 9, 2008 )

Income tax - Notice u/s 148 - AO initiates re-assessment on the belief that some income escaped assessement by way of excess depreciation claimed by the Assessee - Tribunal finds that no such case exists as the assessee had revised its return - Held, given the Tribunal's finding that no reason existed on the day of re-opening the assessment order as the revised return u/s 139(5) was laready filed which obliterated the ground of re-assessment - Revenue's appeal dismissed : MADRAS HIGH COURT ;

2008-TIOL-628-HC-MUM-IT.pdf

Harish Kanayalal Thawani, Bombay Vs S C Prasad (Dated: December 1, 2008 )

Income tax - Sec 269 UD - Petitioners purchase flats from the respondents - Revenue issues show cause notice for acquiring the property on ground that the rate agreed upon by the parties is less than the fair market price - Petitioners furnish rectification application on the ground that the certain sale instances filed by them were not taken note of the Revenue before passing the order - Revenue rejects the same on the ground that it is not permissible in law - Held, first the Revenue should have considered the sale instances mentioned in the petitioners' application, and secondly, the Revenue did not make efforts to arrive at a fair market value, and thirdly, even if one goes by the sale price quoted by the Revenue, the sale value finalised by the parties is less than 15% of the value as decided by the Apex Court - Revenue's order quashed :BOMBAY HIGH COURT ;

2008-TIOL-627-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

CIT, Delhi Vs Contimeters Electricals Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 2, 2008 )

Income tax - Sec 80IA benefits - CIT invokes Sec 263 and disallows deduction on the ground that the assessee fails to fulfill conditions of Sec 80IA(7) which is filing of audit report along with the return - Trinbunal allows the appeal - held, as it is well settled by various HC's decision that filing audit report is only directory and not mandatory if the same is filed before the assessment is completed, benefits cannot be disallowed

Revenue raises another objection that the assessee was not eligible for Sec 80IA benefits - Since the assessee has claimed Sec 80IB benefits and was never called up to explain, Revenue cannot now raise such an objection - Revenue's appeal disallowed:DELHI HIGH COURT ;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2008-TIOL-233-SC-CX.pdf + storysc23308.pdf

CC & CE Vs M/s Hongo India Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 4, 2008)

Central Excise – Reference Application – High Court's power to condone delay – High Court's powers cannot not be circumscribed by Central Excise Act – In view of the Apex Court earlier decision in 2008-TIOL-24-SC- CX matter referred to Larger Bench: The Reference Application was required to be made by the Commissioner to the High Court. It was not required to be made to the authority under the Act. The powers of the High Court were not circumscribed by the statutory provisions. The power of the High Court to condone the delay cannot be circumscribed by the provisions of Section 35. Secondly, in this case, we are concerned with the scope of Section 35H and not with Section 35 of the 1944 Act. Under Section 35H , on an application for reference, the High Court exercises its advisory jurisdiction in a case where it is of the opinion that the substantial question of law of public importance arises. Therefore, in such a case, there is no question of a vested right accruing in favour of either parties . : SUPREME COURT;

2008-TIOL-2060-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s RPG Cables Ltd Vs CCE, Mysore (Dated: May 23, 2008)

Central Excise - no duty on goods destroyed during test :CHENNAI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2059-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Afcons Infrastructure Ltd Vs CCE, Visakhapatnam (Dated: June 27, 2008)

Appeals – Pre-deposit – Revenue has to pay interest on returned Pre-deposit amounts – Tribunal follows judgments of High Court : BANGALORE CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2008-TIOL-633-HC-MUM-ST.pdf + storyhc63308.pdf

Indian National Shipowners Association Vs UoI (Dated: December 11, 2008 )

Service tax – Service abroad – tax in India – valid only from 18.4.2006

Provisions of Rule 2(1 )( d)(iv) clearly invalid – It is further to be seen here that Section 64 gives powers to the Central Government to make rules for carrying out the provisions of the Chapter. The chapter relates to taxing the services which are provided, the taxing on the value of the service and it is only the person who is providing the service can be regarded as an assessee. The rules therefore, cannot be so framed as not to carry the purpose of the Chapter and cannot be conflicted with the provisions in Chapter V of the Act. In other words, as the Act makes the person who is providing the service liable, the provisions in the Rules cannot be made which makes the recipient of the service liable. It is, thus, clear that the provisions of Rule 2(1 )( d)(iv) are clearly invalid.

Before enactment of Section 66A there was no authority vested by law in the Respondents to levy service tax on a person who is resident in India, but who receives services outside India – . Before enactment of Section 66A it is apparent that there was no authority vested by law in the Respondents to levy service tax on a person who is resident in India, but who receives services outside India. In that case till Section 66-A was enacted a person liable was the one who rendered the services. In other words, it is only after enactment of Section 66-A that taxable services received from abroad by a person belonging to India are taxed in the hands of the Indian residents. In such cases, the Indian recipient of the taxable services is deemed to be a service provider. Before enactment of Section 66-A, there was no such provision in the Act and therefore, the Respondents had no authority to levy service tax on the members of the Petitioners-association.

Explanation below Section 65(105 ) :. That explanation was added by Finance Act, 2005 with effect from 16-6-2005. By this explanation services provided by a non-resident outside India to a person residing in India has been declared to be taxable service. Therefore, though the services provided to the members of the Petitioners-Association outside India becomes taxable service, the charge of the tax continues to be on the provider of service as per the scheme of the Act, and because of the explanation also the Respondents do not get authority of law to levy a service tax in relation to the services rendered to the vessels and ships of the members of the Petitioners-association outside India. :BOMBAY HIGH COURT ;

2008-TIOL-2065-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Kawasaki Plant Systems Ltd Vs CCE & CC, Surat (Dated: November 17, 2008)

ST - Consulting Engineer Service - assessee is a non-resident company - Revenue demands tax - assessee claims it is beyond the jurisdiction of the tax authorities as it has no presence in India - pre-deposit waiver granted : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2064-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CCE, Jaipur Vs M/s Goyal Colour Lab (Dated: November 17, 2008)

Service Tax - Once Commissioner(A) has held that the order passed by the adjudicating authority is not a speaking order, he ought to have remanded the matter rather than setting aside the same – Matter remanded by Tribunal. : DELHI CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2063-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE, Vadodara Vs M/s Ghansyam Travels (Dated: November 26, 2008)

Unless the vehicle of the contract carriage permit holder fulfills the requirement as mentioned in Central Motor Vehicle Rules of a “tourist vehicle”, merely because he is holding the contract carriage permit, he does not become liable to tour operator service – Revenue appeal rejected – Madras HC decision in Secretary, Federation of Bus Operators Association of Tamil Nadu Vs. UOI ( 2003-TIOL-33-HC-MAD-ST ) relied upon : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

dgft08pn114.pdf

More items addes to high value manufactured goods for exports benefits;

dgft08not072.pdf

Import of Elastomeric made free;

CASE LAWS

2008-TIOL-632-HC-MUM-CUS.pdf + storyhc63208.pdf

Dr Balabhai Nanavati Hospital And Nanavati Hospital Medical Vs UoI (Dated: November 26, 2008 )

Customs - Hospital Equipment – Withdrawal of Customs Duty Exemption Certificate by DGHS without following principles of natural justice – Not sustainable - An opportunity of being heard, before passing the impugned order, is not an empty formality, but is a valuable right of an individual and is also requirement of law, particularly, when the order has civil consequences. :BOMBAY HIGH COURT ;

2008-TIOL-2062-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s ITI Limited Vs CC, Bangalore (Dated: July 1, 2008)

Customs - Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) – service of the order on the corporate office (address provided by the assessee) is sufficient - Commissioner cannot condone delay in filing appeal : BANGALORE CESTAT;

2008-TIOL-2061-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

Janata Sales Corporation Vs CC, Mumbai (Dated: September 25, 2008)

Customs - classification - investment powder consisting of crystobalite, gypsum, silica and modifying agent is classifiable under TSH 3816. : MUMBAI CESTAT;