|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
'Guardians of Economic Frontiers' - Telecast of Film on Customs (See 'DDT') First Indo-Bangla DG-level talks on drugs concluded; FIPB gives nod to FDI proposals worth Rs 1043 Crore, including Rs 258 Cr of Neo Sports Broadcasting; DGFT again amends import guidelines for marble; ACC approves Mr J K Batra's name for Advance Ruling Authority (Customs & Excise); Inflation further dips to 0.27%; CBEC, armed with necessary approval, all set to issue Chief Commissioner's promotion-cum-posting order today; Commissioners' order also lined up; China breaks ground in ‘South-South' agricultural cooperation: UN; India has duty to use global influence to speak out on Human Rights: UN; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Sending the following files: |
||
|
 |
 |
|
TIOL COMMENTARY ddt 26 march.pdf + rupee_export.pdf + servicetaxroads.pdf Repair of Roads – No Service Tax - holds Commissioner (Appeals) – Revenue loses in spite of all clarifications; Congress manifesto promises GST by 2010! - Is it hinting at restoration of higher excise duty and service tax rate? FIPB gives nod to FDI proposals worth Rs 1043 Crore, including Rs 258 Cr of Neo Sports Broadcasting; MIXED BUZZZ First Indo-Bangla DG-level talks on drugs concluded; Nuclear experts meeting to discuss ways to cut N-reactor fuel risks; China breaks ground in ‘South-South' agricultural cooperation: UN; India has duty to use global influence to speak out on Human Rights: UN; |
- | ||
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
| |
CIT, Delhi-XVII Vs NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation (Dated: March 16, 2009) Income Tax - TDS u/s 192B - Assessee is a Japanese Company - hires expat employees for Indian activities - assessee pays Citizen Tax on behalf of the employees - AO takes the view that the TDS is deductible on such payment - CIT(A) disagrees with the AO on the ground that Citizen Tax in Japan is an overriding charge on all employers and no TDS is liable to be deducted - Tribunal and HC agree with the CIT(A) - held, if Citizen Tax is an overriding charge then no TDS is to be deducted but since the CIT(A) has not examined the Japanese law in this regard, the issue is remanded for fresh examination:SUPREME COURT; CIT, Patiala Vs S K Kaintal (Dated: March 4, 2009) Income tax - Assessee sells agricultural land and treats the same as capital gains - AO takes the view that such income is 'profit and gain from business and profession' as it was purchased at lower rate and sold at much higher rate - CIT(A) disagrees with the AO's view - Tribunal goes with the CIT(A) - held, the effective test for determining the nature of profit is the intention of the seller when he had bought the land and any improvement done to the land to improve its salability - since the assessee was carrying on agriculture on this land for more than two decades, it cannot be treated as an adventure in trade with profit motive - CIT(A) order upheld and Revenue's appeal dismissed: PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT; M/s Grasim Industries Ltd Vs CIT, Bombay (Dated: March 5, 2009) Income tax - AY 1960-61 - Sec 154(2)(b) - rectification of mistake - Assessee files rectification application relating to non-inclusion of half of profits while computing Sec 15(C) benefits - ITO rectifies many other mistakes in the assessment order on his own by going beyond the scope of the application - held, rectification u/s 154 can be done only of mistake on the face of record and not the one which is elucidated, arguable and debatable - since in the instant case the ITO also rectified the computation of debts under rule 3 (3), (4) and (5) which is a debatable point, it cannot be said that what was rectified was a mistake apparent on record - Assessee's appeal allowed:BOMBAYHIGH COURT; Ester Industries Limited Vs CIT, Delhi (Dated: March 6, 2009) Income tax - Rule 6B and 6D - AO makes disallowances for expenditure on gifts and travelling - CIT(A) deletes them - Tribunal restores AO's order - held, it is true that the AO and the Tribunal went by the disallowance claimed by the assessee in its original and even revised return but the Tribunal should have applied its mind to the question that whethe assessee can do so which are otherwise permissible by statutory provisions of law - had the assessee been given a chance to explain the confusion could perhaps have been sorted out - Matter remanded to the AO for fresh examination - Assessee's appeal allowed:DELHI HIGH COURT; ITO, Chennai Vs M/s Sak Soft Ltd (Dated : March 06, 2009) Income Tax - formula under sub-section (4) of section 10B - the freight, telecom charges or insurance attributable to the delivery of articles or things or computer software outside India or the expenses, incurred in foreign exchange in providing the technical services outside India are to be excluded both from the export turnover and from the total turnover: It may be an easy task to exclude the freight, telecom charges or insurance attributable to the delivery of computer software outside India or expenses, if any, incurred in foreign exchange in providing the technical services outside India from the export turnover and the total turnover if they are separately mentioned in the invoice raised by the assessee. In the course of the arguments addressed on behalf of M/s. Sak Soft Ltd., a question arose as to what would happen if these items are not separately shown in the invoice and are included in the total amount raised by the invoice. It was conceded on behalf of the assessee by its representative that in such a case, the Assessing Officer will have the power to go behind the invoice and find out how much of the invoice mount pertains to the recovery of the aforesaid items:CHENNAI ITAT SPECIAL BENCH; M/s Om Metals Infraprojects Ltd Vs CIT, Jaipur (Dated : December 31, 2008) Income Tax - Assessee filed return claiming deduction u/s 80IA(4) which was accepted by AO - CIT(A) exercised power u/s 263 and set aside AO's order holding that assessee company is only a contractor carrying out specific work with respect to the irrigation project and is not the 'Developer' of irrigation project - Held, for application of provisions u/s 263, two conditions are required to be fulfilled, (i) the order of the AO sought to be revised is erroneous and (ii) such order is prejudicial to the interest of revenue - Held, assessment were neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue as AO has given categorical finding on the issue after discussing the same in detail - Assessee's appeal allowed:JAIPUR ITAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
SERVICE TAX SECTION 2009-TIOL-150-HC-MUM-ST.pdf + hc st story.pdf Indian National Shipowners Association Vs UoI (Dated: March 23, 2009) Service Tax –supply of vessels to ONGC – mining or supply of tangible goods - Introduction of new entry and inclusion of certain services in that entry would presuppose that there was no earlier entry covering the said services; supply of vessels not taxable prior to 16.5.2008: The services rendered by the members of the 1st petitioner are covered by entry ( zzzzj ) because they inter alia supply vessels offshore support vessels, barges, tugs etc. without transferring right of possession and effective control over them. In contrast entry ( zzzy ) was introduced to comprehensively bring under the service tax net activities having a direct nexus to mining activities. Entry ( zzzzj ) is not carved out of entry ( zzzy ). Both entries are independent. Entry ( zzzzj ) was not inserted into the Finance Act by amending entry ( zzzy ). It is not possible to invent a remote connection of the services rendered by the members of the 1st petitioner to mining activities and hold that they fall in entry ( zzzy ). Entry ( zzzzj ) is not a species of what is covered by entry ( zzzy ). “In relation to” Scope of the phrase "in relation to" is indeed wide. But its parameters have to be understood in its context. The services rendered by a person must have a direct or a proximate relation to the subject matter of the taxing entry and the context in which the words 'in relation to' are used has to be borne in mind to judge the extent of the scope of an entry which maybe of wide amplitude. In the circumstances of the case services having remote connections cannot be included in entry ( zzzy ) merely on the strength of the words "in relation to".:BOMBAYHIGH COURT; M/s Indian Chemicals & Minerals Vs CCE, Salem (Dated: January 29, 2009) Service Tax – Clearing & Forwarding Agents vis-à-vis Commission Agent – Stay /dispensation of pre-deposit - The activity undertaken by the appellant did not constitute C&F Agent's service. The clarification issued by the CBEC is to the effect that selling of goods of the principal as an Agent was the job of a “Commission Agent”. The activity of a Commission Agent is appropriately covered under BAS introduced on 9.7.2004. The appellant is also registered as a provider of BAS. Prima facie, the same activity could not have been validly subjected to tax under another category. In the circumstances, complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the service tax and penalties ordered. ( Para 4):CHENNAI CESTAT; M/s Cerebral Learning Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Indore (Dated: February 10, 2009) ST - Commercial Coaching Service - Assessee seeks exclusion of study materials sold on the ground that the same cannot form part of the service taxable - held, since there is no clear-cut evidence indicating whether the study materials was sold only to the service recipients or others, pre-deposit ordered:DELHI CESTAT;
CIRCULAR Export Warehousing- extension of facility to for inclusion of Thiruvallur district in the state of Tamilnadu -reg.; CASE LAWS CCE, Thane Vs Daisy Trading Corporation (Dated: March 16, 2009) Central Excise - Sec 35(c)(2) - ROM - Revenue files petition on the baiss of Commissioner taking the view that canvas cloth and tarpaulin cloth fall under Chapter heading 52.07 - Tribunal holds that such a ground cannot be a treated as a mistake apparent from the record - dismissed petition as the said goods are exempted from basic excise duty but additional excise duty is leviable - held, the scope of Sec 35(c)(2) is very limited and the finding of the Tribunal is a question of facts - no substantial question of law involved - Revenue's appeal dismissed:SUPREME COURT; 2009-TIOL-497-CESTAT-DEL.pdf + essar story.pdf M/s Essar Steel Ltd Vs CCE, Raipur (Dated: January 14, 2009) Central Excise – Manufacture and clearance of iron ore concentrate – Department initially alleged activity undertaken by appellants as not manufacture but charges dropped subsequently – Stoppage of duty payment and reversal of CENVAT credit for two months in the interim as a result of confusion created by department – Iron ore concentrate used in manufacture of finished goods cleared on payment of duty in appellants other unit – Pre-deposit of Rs. 37 crores waived and stay granted:DELHI CESTAT; M/s Sanghi Industries Ltd Vs CCE, Rajkot (Dated: January 2, 2009) Central Excise – Issue of supplementary invoice by service provider – Availability of credit of service tax paid on GTA service – Mention of name and address of service provider in invoice important but not registration number as observed by Appellate Commissioner – Actual receipt of GTA service and usage thereof in or in relation to manufacture sufficient for taking credit – Matter remanded to Appellate Commissioner to reconsider issue:AHMEDABD CESTAT; M/s Gujrat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Limited Vs CCE & CC, Vadodara-I (Dated: December 17, 2008) Central Excise - provisional assessment - refund and liability arising from the same transaction - transactions cannot be split to treat liability as different and refund as different - liability has to be adjusted against the refund.:AHMEDABD CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION CIRCULAR Guidelines for import of Marble by EOUs; CASE LAWS 2009-TIOL-494-CESTAT-AHM.pdf + cus refund story.pdf M/s Adani Wilmar Ltd Vs CC, Jamnagar (Dated: February 4, 2009) Refund Claim sought to be rejected because assessment not challenged – copy of assessment order not given to assessee –Revenue directed to give a copy - In this strange case, the Revenue has not given a copy of the assessment order to the assessee, but wants refund to be rejected because the assessment order was not challenged. Commissioner (Appeals) order containing directions to serve copy of assessed Bills of Entry to the appellant upheld. If the same has not been done by the Revenue, awaiting decision in the present appeal, the same by be served now on receipt of the order and shall be challenged by the appellant before appropriate forum. Thereafter, refund claims in dispute, shall be decided.:AHMEDABD CESTAT; |
|
||
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Limited |
