Sahar Airport Customs seizes electronic goods worth Rs 22 lakh from pax coming from Singapore by Jet Airways;

SEBI to notify guidelines to investors group protection Scheme;

Implementation of revised pay-scale of teachers: HRD Ministry clarifies notification already issued by Central Govt;

Recovery of US Economy to take years, says Obama

ACC shifts Dileep Raj Singh Chaudhary from DIPP to Home Ministry as Addl Secretary ;

Fuel price cut brings down inflation to 4.39%;

TIOL COMMENTARY

DRI story.pdf + cic order.pdf

All material related to DRI should be construed to be within scope of section 24 of RTI Act and exempted from disclosure: CIC;

energy story.pdf

Initiative against climate change: Govt to launch National Solar Mission; Solar city scheme floated;

MIXED BASKET

mbuzz0164.pdf

Delhi needs 75000 dwelling units per annum;

mbuzz0163.pdf

Govt consulting stake-holders to draft Model Real Estate Regulation Bill;

mbuzz0162.pdf

India, WB sign pact for USD 518 mn aid for health schemes;

mbuzz0161.pdf

Value Added Services to account for 30% of revenue to telecom operators;

2009-TIOL-106-ITAT-MUM.pdf

M/s Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vs ITO, Mumbai (Dated: December 02, 2008)

Income tax - assessee claims depreciation and deduction u/s 80HHC - AO allows - initiates proceedings u/s 147 after four years for allowing excess depreciation on motor vehicles and benefits of miscellaneous income u/s 80HHC - held, it is established that the powers conferred under Section 147 of the Act for reopening concluded assessment cannot be exercised arbitrarily or mechanically. It must be based on reasons pursuant to amendments brought in Section 147 of the Act, expression 'reason to believe' was reintroduced. Even the CBDT has issued circulars to the effect that mere change in opinion cannot from the basis for reopening a completed assessment. In this case the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) and no additional materail was gathered by the AO to reopen the assessment and such an action is hit by the provision of proviso to Sec 147 - AO's action is legally not sustainable - Assessee's appeal allowed: MUMBAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-105-ITAT-AMRITSAR.pdf

ITO, Meerut Vs Manglam Hospita (AOP) (Dated: December 19, 2008)

Income Tax Act - Section 185 - Partnership Firm - if the assessee has not filed copy of partnership deed alongwith the return if is a curable mistake which can be cured by filing the return before the lower authorities even at appellate stage.

Income Tax Act - Section 142A - Held, whenever a provision is inserted in the statute book retrospectively, all the authorities administering the Act as well as the courts are bound to take legal cognizance of such provisions. Such provision is always presumed to be on the statute book from the date of its application. Hence provision has to be applied by the appellate authorities/Tribunal/courts in all the pending cases. The second consequence of such retrospective enactment is that concluded assessments can be reopened/revised/rectified as the case may be if the period of limitation is available. The Legislature has excluded only the cases falling in the second category i.e. the concluded assessments from the operation of such section. In other words, the Legislature considered it necessary to confer the powers on AO retrospectively only in those cases which are pending for adjudication before the higher forum: AMRITSAR ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-270-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

Rolex Logistics Pvt Ltd Vs CST, Bangalore (Dated: September 23, 2009)

ST - Management Consultancy Service - assessee was engaged in management consultancy service - takes over operations of two proprietary firms - Revenue alleges that the assessee suppressed the value of taxable service - demand raised and extended period invoked - interest and penalty levied - assessee pleads no tax is leviable on reimbursement - held, it is settled law that the tax is leviable only on the payments relating to the service provided and not expenses reimbursed to the service provider - since assessee has been paying tax regularly and Revenue fails to substantiate its charge, no extended period is invokable - Assessee's appeal allowed: BANGALORE ITAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-272-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

Selvarathnam Matched Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Tirunelveli (Dated: December 4, 2008)

Central Excise - Remission of duty on goods destroyed in fire - remission rejected on the ground that the assessee was careless - nobody invites loss of property by accidents by choosing to be careless - appellant entitled for remission: CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

dgftnot85.pdf

Ban on export of wheat & wheat products: Export of wheat flour to Maldives exempted;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-271-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Akbar Exports Ltd Vs CC, Chennai (Dated: December 8, 2008)

Customs - Export - DEEC Scheme - Non-fulfillment of export obligation - Penalty - The appellants admit their liability to pay duty for non-fulfillment of export obligation. DGFT has clarified that wastage of 5% be allowed in respect of import items required for making of the final product by the appellants. Since the clarification of the DGFT has been obtained after the passing of the impugned orders, the duty liability is required to be recomputed in the light of the above clarification. Penalty cannot be set aside due to the admitted fact of non-fulfillment of export obligation. However, penalty is to be re-determined after arriving at the correct duty liability. Matter remanded: CHENNAI CESTAT;