Govt plans to set up Marine Casualty Investigation Bureau;

Parliament gives nod to amendment to Carriage by Air Bill, 2008;

No exhaustive study of lay-offs due to economic slowdown done yet: Minister;

Delhi Govt unfolds guidelines for setting up SEZ;

Appoint President of CESTAT – Bar Association writ in Supreme Court;

1655 Associations received foreign contribution of more than Rs 1 Crore during 2006-07;

Knowledge kiosks to be set up in every Panchayat: Minister;

DRI arrests key player in Delhi ICD case; Chennai DRI seizes gold worth Rs 1.6 Cr; IGI Airport Customs seizes drugs;

Satyam fraud case: CBI proposes to set up multi-disciplinary investigation team;

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 19 Feb.pdf

Appoint President of CESTAT – Bar Association writ in Supreme Court;

cobweb.pdf

Interim Budget: Will voters fail to recognise the 'hand' that may rock the cradle of Indian Economy?

corrigendum.pdf

Travelling Allowance Rules - Implementation of the Sixth Central Pay Commission.;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0187.pdf

Govt takes steps for promotion of Indian films abroad;

mbuzz0185.pdf

Parliament gives nod to amendment to Carriage by Air Bill, 2008;

mbuzz0184.pdf

No exhaustive study of lay-offs due to economic slowdown done yet: Minister;

mbuzz0183.pdf

Knowledge kiosks to be set up in every Panchayat: Minister;

mbuzz0182.pdf

1655 Associations received foreign contribution of more than Rs 1 Crore during 2006-07;

mbuzz0181.pdf

DRI nabs key player in Delhi ICD case; Chennai DRI seizes gold worth Rs 1.6 Cr; IGI Airport Customs arrests lady with drugs;

mbuzz0180.pdf

Satyam fraud case: CBI proposes to set up 'dynamic' team for probe;

Press Release.pdf

Scope of TRP Scheme enlaged to include return-filing for TDS & Service Tax;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-81-HC-DEL-IT.pdf + mayawati story.pdf

Mayawati Vs CIT, Delhi (Dated: February 13, 2009)

Income Tax – Mayawati loses writ – Delayed service of notice – petitioner declined to accept the notice at three places – firstly at C-1/11, Humayun Road, New Delhi – 110 003, secondly at Property No.3 , Survey No.105 , Nehru Road, Cantonment, Lucknow , Uttar Pradesh and thirdly at 5, Kalidas Marg , Lucknow , Uttar Pradesh. All three addresses belonged to the Petitioner at the relevant time.

Wherever service of a notice is essential or critical, experience shows that it is a most difficult task to achieve - if a letter is properly addressed, it must be deemed to have been served - It is for this reason that Section 27 of the General Clauses Act creates a statutory presumption to the effect that if a letter is properly addressed, it must be deemed to have been served - It would, therefore, be reasonable to hold that when service is effected by refusal of a postal communication the addressee must be imputed with the knowledge of the contents thereof :BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-80-HC-MUM-IT.pdf

Miss Deanna J Jeejeebhoy Vs WTO, Bombay (Dated: January 22, 2009)

Wealth tax - assessee has three sisters - along with their mother they have one-fourth share in a building - property is given on leave and licence basis - besides licence fee they also obtain refundable deposits - calculation of wealth tax - assessees claim reduction of their debt owed to the tenant againt the refundable deposit - Revenue disallows on the ground that a part of debt was invested in capital investment bonds which was exempt from wealth tax - held, the net wealth is to be calculated by deducting all the debts from the assets, excepting the three kinds of debts which are specified in (i), (ii) and (iii) of Sec 2(m) and once it is accepted that the security deposit taken by the applicants was a debt in respect of property which was chargeable to wealth tax then the said security deposit could not amount to a debt covered by section 2(m) (ii). Merely because a part of the amount obtained by the applicants were invested in capital investment bonds which were not chargeable to wealth tax, that by itself does not change the nature of the debt. There is no provision in the Wealth Tax Act where a debt secured on or incurred in relation to property in respect of which wealth tax is chargeable ceases to be a debt or changes its character into one of a non deductible debt merely because it is invested in an instrument which is not chargeable to income tax - Assessee's appeal allowed:BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-115-ITAT-MUM.pdf

ITO, Mumbai Vs Modi Motors (Dated: December 12, 2008)

Income Tax - Assessee, a partnership firm, claimed deduction u/s 10(10D) on account of Keyman Insurance Policy premium paid on the life insurance policies of two of its working partners - AO disallowed the claim on the ground that partnership firm in not a separate legal entity - CIT(A) allowed the assessee's claim holding the firm and its partners as separate persons—Held, partnership firm is a separate entity than that of its partners under the Income-tax Act and if there exist any specific provision in the Income-tax law modifying the partnership law then, such specific provision shall be applied and if the tax law is silent on a specific issue, then a reference will have to be made to the provisions of partnership law for the adjudication of the same - Held, Sec. 10(10D) recognize the existence of other types of relationship apart from employer-employee relationship for claiming deduction on account of premium paid on Keyman Insurance Policy as business expenditure - Revenue's appeal partly dismissed.:MUMBAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-114-ITAT-DEL.pdf

Showa Corporation Vs ACIT, New Delhi (Dated: September 24, 2008)

Income Tax - Assessee claims deduction toward TDS through rectification application  after intimation u/s 143(1)(a) is issued to the assessee – AO rejects it on the ground that that original TDS certificates were neither attached with the return nor with rectification application - CIT (A) upholds AO order - Held, in absence of any evidence before the Tribunal, assessee's claim of filing certificate rejected :DELHI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

CCE & CC, Vadodara-II Vs Schott Glass India Pvt Ltd (Dated: January 22, 2009)

Service Tax – Taxable event is rendering of taxable service., not raising of invoice or payment – The taxable event is providing all taxable services which has been defined by Section 65(105) of the Act. The taxable event in relation to Service Tax is admittedly the rendering of taxable service. The said taxable services were rendered between November 2001 and March 2002. In the circumstances, merely because the invoice is raised and payment made subsequently viz. after 16.05.2002 the liability cannot be fastened on the recipient of the services as the taxable event had already occurred past and raising of invoices and/or making of payment cannot be considered to be a taxable event. Nor is it possible to hold that the provision of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Rules is retrospectively applicable to services rendered prior to 16.08.2002. Thus, neither the Section nor the Rule even suggests that the taxable event is the raising of an invoice for making of payment.:GUJARAT HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-299-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CCE, Ludhiana Vs M/s Asian Cranes & Engg Services (Dated: January 20, 2009)

ST - Management and Maintenance or Repair Service - Commissioner (A) upholds demand and penalty under Sec 78 but sets aside penalty under Ss 76 and 77 - held, since no suppression has been alleged in the second show cause notice issued for later period, there is no merit in the Revenue's appeal for stay of the Commissioner (A) order:DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-298-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Kum Kum Education Academy Vs CST, Ahmedabad (Dated: December 30, 2008)

ST - Coaching service - assessee has been paying tax but stopped doing so in the bona fide belief that no tax is payable by an institute providing coaching in foreign language - Commissioner (A) asks for deposit of 25% of penalty - since tax with interest is already deposited, it is sufficient for purpose of Sec 35F and matter remanded to fresh examination on merits:DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-297-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s BSNL Vs CCE, Jaipur (Dated: January 7, 2009)

ST - telecom service - assessee fails to furnish TR-6 challan as a proof of payment of service tax - Revenue raises demand and levies penalty - assessee argues it has already declared so in ST-5 Form and also produces letter of Sr Commercial Accounts Officer to this end - waiver from pre-deposit granted:DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-296-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Hindustan Zinc Ltd Vs CCE, Jaipur (Dated: January 2, 2009)

ST - Refund - Assessee receives services from non-resident company which has no office in India - pays tax under 'Consulting Engineer Service' - files refund claims - Revenue rejects it - In view of Larger Bench decision in the case of assessee only it was decided that prior to 1/1/2005 tax was not leviable on the recipent - matter remanded for fresh examination:DELHI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-20-SC-CX.pdf

CCE, Mumbai Vs Pepsico India Holdings (P) Ltd (Dated: January 14, 2009)

Central Excise – valuation – trade discount – deduction entitled as there is no flow-back - "machine usage charges" do not form part of assessable value – Department's appeal dismissed.:SUPREME COURT;

2009-TIOL-83-HC-MUM-CX.pdf + cenvat story.pdf

M/s Hiren Aluminium Ltd Vs UoI (Dated: January 16, 2009)

Restriction in utilisation of CENVAT Credit – Rule 12CC of CER and 12AA of CCR challenged – Interim stay of CBEC's order granted: Restraining a manufacturer from utilising the CENVAT credit has serious civil consequences, because where a manufacturer purchases duty paid inputs and utilises the same in the manufacture of final product, then the said manufacturer under the Central Excise law is entitled to take credit of duty paid on the inputs and utilise the same in payment of excise duty payable on the final product. :BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-302-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s ITI Ltd Vs CCE & CC, Calicut (Dated: October 14, 2008)

Central Excise – Value of software cleared along with OCB exchanges not includible in Assessable Value of OCB exchanges – software cleared is not an embedded software and is an independent excisable commodity under CETA, 1985 - When declaration is filed under Rule 173B classifying software separately, there is no suppression of facts – Demand of duty and imposition of penalty set aside – Appeal allowed with consequential relief:BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-301-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Jayashree Aluminium & Alloys Vs CCE, Chennai (Dated:November 21, 2008)

Central Excise – CENVAT Credit of duty debited in DEPB – during the material period, ratio of Essar Steel has to be followed in absence of any stay on the said ruling – Credit is not admissible. :CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

CIRCULAR

dgft08cir063.pdf

Requirement of PHA release order for import of raw cashewnuts - exemption thereof.;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-21-SC-AD.pdf

Designated Authority Vs Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd (Dated: January 27, 2009)

Anti Dumping - Whether Anti-dumping Duty is country specific, rather than exporter specific and can DA claim confidentiality – matter referred to Larger Bench:SUPREME COURT;

2009-TIOL-300-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s South India Paper Mills Ltd Vs CC & CE, Tuticorin (Dated: October 15, 2008)

Customs – Import- Refund – Unjust enrichment – The appellant paid CVD on imported waste paper when eligible for exemption vide Notification No.21/02-Cus dt.01.03.2002. Appellants claimed refund. The Cost Accountant has certified that the amount of refund claimed had been accounted as receivables from customs in the balance sheet + that the amount incurred by the appellants towards CVD has not been taken into account for costing of the final product manufactured and sold by the appellants + Appellants had reversed the corresponding CVD credit in their cenvat account. These evidences abundantly establish that the appellants are eligible for cash refund of the erroneously paid CVD and that the vice of unjust enrichment would not be attracted in granting refund to the appellants. Appeal allowed. ( Para 3) :CHENNAI CESTAT;