IMG on packaging rules calls for streamlining of labeling on packages;

India, UK to ink pacts to protect copyrights;

Cold Wave envelopes North India; Death toll crosses 30-mark;

Indian Science Congress: PM calls for qualitative development in research;

Govt sets up Panel to look into grievances of oil sector executives on pay revision;

thursday story.pdf

Competition Commission to be fully functional this fiscal; MoC working on new law for valuation professionals;

textile story.pdf

Value addition in textile industry grows by 16% in 2008; TUFS proves to be a catalyst;

mbuzz0012.pdf

IMG on packaging rules calls for streamlining of labeling on packages ;

mbuzz0011.pdf

India, Malaysia sign MoU to improve conditions of employment of workers;

mbuzz0010.pdf

Indian Science Congress: PM calls for qualitative development in research;

mbuzz0009.pdf

Govt sets up Panel to look into grievances of oil sector executives on pay revision ;

2009-TIOL-04-ITAT-BANG.pdf + azimji story.pdf

Shri Azim Hasham Premji Vs DCWT, Bangalore (Dated: November 7, 2008)

Azim Premji's Wealth Tax case – all issues covered by Tribunal's decision in the assessee's own case for earlier years – matter remanded : BANGALORE ITAT;

2009-TIOL-03-ITAT-DEL.pdf

South Asian Enterprises Ltd Vs ACIT, New Delhi (Dated: August 14, 2008)

Income Tax - Assessee is into entertainment business - takes old Forts on lease - claims deduction for repair expenses and rents paid for the Forts – AO disallows on the ground that expenses  not connected with the business - CIT (A) upholds disallowances - Held, no  business was carried out by the assessee  in the Forts in the previous year. The assessee has also not furnished the details of the repair expenses incurred on the Fort from which it could be ascertained whether the expenses were incurred for the business. Since the assessee has not carried out any business, it is irrelevant to look into the main object clause of Articles of Association of the company to see whether the other business of the assessee is being run as per the object clause of Articles of Association of the Company. Assessee's appeal dismissed.:DELHI ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-21-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

Shree Rajasthan Syntex Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Jaipur II (Dated: November 14, 2008)

Central Excise - refund - assessee is a manufacturer of man made yarn - Revenue raises a demand of duty for freight, insurance and forwarding charges which are to be included in the assessable value - Assessee deposits the duty - Commissioner (A) sets aside the adjudication order - refund claim filed for duty paid partly by PLA and partly from Cenvat account - Assessee also suo moto avails credit against the claim made for refund from cenvat credit - duty confirmed and penalty imposed for the same - held, since the refund for duty deposited in PLA was sanctioned by the Revenue as it was not hit by unjust enrichment, the matter remitted for fresh examination in view of the larger bench decision in BDH Industries case (2008-TIOL-1211-CESTAT-MUM-LB) :DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-18-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + invoice story.pdf

EBG India Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Nashik (Dated: December 3, 2008)

CENVAT credit - Supplementary Invoices notified on 29.08.2000 vide notfn 51/2000-CE(N.T) as eligible documents for availing credit - If the appellants were entitled to take MODVAT credit on their inputs prior to 1.4.2000 on the strength of the original invoices issued by the supplier, they could validly claim to be entitled to take CENVAT credit of the additional amounts of duty paid on the same goods by the supplier under the supplementary invoices.

There is no reason to hold that supplementary invoice evidencing payment of additional duty amount should be treated on a different footing vis-à-vis the original invoices evidencing original payment of duty on the said goods inasmuch as both these documents were issued under the same provision of law.

Benefit of CENVAT credit of additional duty paid on inputs under cover of supplementary invoices issued under rule 52A cannot be denied to the appellants on the ground that the differential duty certificates were issued under a provision (rule 57E), which was non-existent during the period of dispute, or on the ground that such certificates were not issued by the proper officer, the substantive conditions for availment of CENVAT credit having admittedly been fulfilled by the party - Apex Court decision in Home Ashok Leyland Ltd., [ 2007-TIOL-42-SC-CX ] relied upon .

Order set aside and Appeal allowed. :DELHI CESTAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-19-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Cadila Healthcare Ltd Vs CCE, Ahmedabad (Dated: December 2, 2008)

ST - Service tax with interest demanded for a bunch of services - In view of the stay granted in a similar case in assessee's own case earlier, stay petition allowed :AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-16-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Shree Vibgyor Colour Lab Vs CCE, Raipur (Dated: November 14, 2008)

When the appellant had failed to make a pre-deposit, the Commissioner(A) ought not to have decided the matter on merits – total failure of justice prejudicing interest of Revenue - Matter remanded: DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-15-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Shiv Network Vs CCE & CC, Daman (Dated: October 31, 2008)

ST - Cable Operator Service - Revenue finds assessee is not registered and has not paid tax - On being pointed out the assessee pays tax - penalty imposed - assessee pleads for waiver - Penalty under Ss 76 and 78 are mandatory and the only discretionary section is 80 - since tax with interest deposited before issue of show cause notice, only 25% penalty is to be levied if the assessee pays within 30 days :AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2009-TIOL-20-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Leitronics Vijay India Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Chennai (Dated: August 14, 2008)

Customs – classification - there can be no confiscation of the goods on the ground of misclassification because classification is essentially a departmental function :CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-17-CESTAT-KOL.pdf

M/s Toplane Vs CC, Kolkata (Dated: October 16, 2008)

Customs – Availability of comparable prices sufficient to doubt truth and accuracy of import price – Departments recourse to best judgment method to re-determine import price upheld – No infirmity in impugned orders :KOLKATA CESTAT;