Govt clears doubts in guidelines on downstream investment by Indian Companies; (See Common Basket)

Defence ministry announces comprehensive plan to tackle threat from sea; Indian Navy to be the nodal authority for maritime security; Navy to raise a new specialised force 'Sagar Prahari Bal';

Anti-dumping duty imposed on Plain Medium Density Fibre Board; (See Customs Section)

PC takes a bundle of initiatives; brings back internal security paradigm in elegant shape;

India, South Africa trade to jump to USD 12 bn by 2012;

DDA housing scam: Demand-cum-allotment letters put on hold;

16 Bills passed during last session of Parliament;

TIOL COMMENTARY

downsteam story.pdf + pn4_2009.pdf

Govt clears doubts in guidelines on downstream investment by Indian Companies;

stgst.pdf

Service tax refund to exporters: A mirage?

editorial.pdf

The pangs of growth - economics destined to prevail over politics in long-run!

CASE LAW

2009-TIOL-25-SC-ENTRY.pdf

Addison & Co Ltd Vs State of Kerala (Dated: February 26, 2009)

Entry Tax - Karnataka Act - Assessee argues disputed goods are consumables for lathe and drilling machines and cannot be treated as tools or accessories - Revenue pleads machines cannot work without these tools - Assessee contends that machines can work on their own but cannot perform specific function without them - Held, since the assessee has not produced any evidence that the machines can function without the disputed goods, the Tribunal and the HC orders are upheld but the Revenue needs to decide what distinguishes consummable from accessories - assessee's appeal dismissed: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0227.pdf

PC takes a bundle of initiatives; brings back internal security paradigm in elegant shape;

mbuzz0226.pdf

India, South Africa trade to jump to USD 12 bn by 2012;

mbuzz0225.pdf

DDA housing scam: Demand-cum-allotment letters put on hold;

mbuzz0224.pdf

16 Bills passed during last session of Parliament;

2009-TIOL-131-ITAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Rajmahal Trade & Investment Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, Bangalore (Dated: August 08, 2008)

Computation of income under sec. 115JB – Provision towards diminution in the value of assets cannot be added back by AO.

While computing the income chargeable under sec. 115JB, AO added back Rs. 32 lakhs being provision to wards diminution in the value of assets holding that it is not an ascertained liability. On appeal, Tribunal reversed the order following the Apex court decision in Apollo Tyres Ltd. Vs CIT wherein it was held that AO had no power to recompute the book profit ascertained in accordance with Part II & III of Sch. VI to Companies Act.

Appeal by assessee allowed.: BANGALORE ITAT;

2009-TIOL-130-ITAT-MUM.pdf

Pacific Internet (India) Pvt Ltd Vs ITO, Mumbai (Dated: December 23, 2008)

Income tax - Sec 194J - assessee buys bandwidth from MTNL and VSNL and provides internet facility to its customers - AO treats it as technical service and holds the assessee in default for not deducting tax at source - raises demand u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) - CIT(A) agrees with the AO's view - held, the payment made to the bandwidth providers for purchase of internet facility and the other infrastructure cannot be treated as a fee for technical services within the meaning of Sec 194J read with Sec 9(1)(vii) as there is no rendering of any technical service involved in the entire process - it is a mere act of purchase and sale of internet access facility - Assessee's appeal allowed: MUMBAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-359-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE, Vapi Vs M/s Jindal Photo Ltd (Dated: January 27, 2009)

Service tax - Cenvat credit - assessee avails credit on invoices issued by head office which is not registered as input service distributor - credit cannot be denied on procedural ground and then the assessee had a bona fide reason for omission - Revenue's appeal dismissed: AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-357-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE, Vapi Vs M/s Unimark Remedies Ltd (Dated: December 26, 2008)

ST - Cenvat Credit - assessee avails credit for tax paid on GTA service on the basis of declaration made by GTAs on their letter heads - Revenue disallows - held, the requirement of declaration in the invoice is only procedural, and since there is substantial compliance with the requirement of the Notification, credit cannot be denied - Revenue's appeal rejected: AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-360-CESTAT-KOL.pdf + haldia story.pdf

M/s Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd Vs CCE, Haldia (Dated: December 16, 2008)

Central Excise – Valuation - where onward freight was not includible in the assessable value, there was no question of return freight being included: It defies all logic that for Central Excise purposes, the freight for carrying the empty container back is held to be part of the assessable value of the manufactured goods, whereas the outward freight for carrying goods is not considered to be part of the assessable value. Considering the fact that it is a legal requirement to use specially designed containers for carrying the goods which is notified as an explosive and consequently, the return of the empty containers that carry the impugned goods namely, Butadiene becomes a necessity and considering the fact that transaction value exclusive of the freight element ,is available for sale at the factory gate, such transaction value has to be taken as the assessable value under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. There is no need for taking recourse to Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules in this case, as has been done by the Adjudicating Commissioner nor is there any warrant in law to include the Return Fare for empty containers in the assessable value: KOLKATA CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-100-HC-P&H-CX.pdf

M/s Rama Industries Ltd Vs CCE, Chandigarh (Dated: February 10, 2009)

Central Excise - Rule 5 of CCRs, 2002 - Cenvat credit - refund in cash - held, in view of the fact that the Karnataka HC held that refund in cash of Cenvat Credit is allowed in case of closure of the manufacturing unit and the SLP against the same order dismissed by the SC as the Revenue had not apealed against similar orders of the Tribunal in many cases, the issue is settled today and there is no substantial question of law involved - Assessee's appeal allowed: PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

CIRCULAR + NOTIFICATION

ctariff09_021.pdf

Anti-dumping duty imposed on Plain Medium Density Fibre Board;

dgft08not089.pdf + dgft08cir066.pdf + dgft08cir065.pdf

Guidelines for import of rough marble blocks for year 2008-09;

dgft08not088.pdf

Related to changes done by Annual Supplement to FTP - many key words like 'realised', 'BRC', 'Nominated Agecnies' etc substituted;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-358-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s P A Footwear Pvt Ltd Vs CC (Export), Chennai (Dated: December 04, 2008)

Customs – Import – Mis-declaration – Confiscation – Penalty - Stay /Dispensation of pre-deposit – With the description entered in the Bill of Entry, it was impossible in the EDI system to detect whether the assessment of the goods at “Nil” rate of CVD claimed in terms of Notification No.6/06-CE was correct. Claiming “Nil” rate of assessment of CVD tantamounts to consciously misdeclaring the imported goods as “sewing machines other than with inbuilt motor”. However, the packing list submitted to the department clearly shows that the consignment also contained motors. It cannot be categorically held at this stage that the importer deliberately misdeclared the description of the goods to avail an undue benefit. Complete waiver of pre-deposit granted and stay against recovery of penalty ordered. (Para 4): CHENNAI CESTAT;