Issues referred to Special Bench of ITAT (See 'DDT');

MCA accepts proposal to defer enforcement of Accounting Standard 11;

UN Joins global task force to create new 'Green' economy;

OECD Ministers call for regional responses to global crisis;

DGFT allows import of waste paper against licence based on NOC issued by MoEF;

DoT orders audit of books of Vodafone, Airtel, Idea Cellular and Tata Teleservices;

Financial turmoil may trigger development catastrophe: UN;

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 2 april.pdf

Guidelines for import of Precious Metal by the Nominated agencies – DGFT clarification;

cobweb.pdf

G20: Will it be a 20-20 against tax havens? Will PM come back with some goods news for India?

MIXED BUZZZ

mbuzz0353.pdf

Global crisis requires global solutions, says PM;

mbuzz0352.pdf

UN Joins global task force to create new 'Green' economy;

mbuzz0351.pdf

Financial turmoil may trigger development catastrophe: UN;

mbuzz0350.pdf

OECD Ministers call for regional responses to global crisis;

2009-TIOL-09-ARA-IT.pdf + ara story 02.pdf

M/s Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd (Dated: March 31, 2009)

Provision for bad and doubtful debts - If the enactment is expressed in language which is fairly capable of either interpretation, it ought to be construed as prospective only. The Legislature, by the present amendment, seeks to restrict the benefit which the Statute hitherto provided to the assessee, unless such restriction is specifically made retrospective under normal circumstances, such provisions cannot be read as retrospective in nature. ……. amendments which create a higher obligation on the assessee shall be deemed to be prospective unless otherwise specifically provided.

The debit in the appropriation account would not by itself disentitle the applicant from claiming the deduction. We have to see the substance and real nature of the methodology adopted by the applicant. mere debit in the appropriation account by the assessee would not disentitle the assessee from claiming deduction when the same is permissible to it under the provisions of section 36(1)( viia )(c) of the Act, more so, when the same has consistently been allowed by the department since 1990-91 to 1995-96:ADVANCE RULING AUTHORITY;

2009-TIOL-08-ARA-IT.pdf + ara story.pdf

Worleyparsons Services Pty Ltd (Dated: March 30, 2009)

Income tax - Indo-Australia DTAA - Assessee is into providing engineering services - signs agreement with the India company for setting up Alumina Plant - executes part of work in India and part in Australia - admits its income is royalty taxable u/s 9(1)(vii) as well as Article 12 of DTAA - but claims income attributable to part services executed outside India is not taxable - held, the ratio of Apex Court decision in Ishikawajima not applicable of the case as there were offshore supplies of goods in respect of which title passed outside the territorial limits of India, and there were offshore engineering services which were rendered entirely outside India i.e. from the head-office of appellant company. Separate consideration was fixed for these supplies and services. There were also onshore services and onshore supplies which took place in India. Thus, a composite contract consisted of distinct and severable segments, some having territorial nexus with India , some not having such nexus. That is how it was viewed by the Supreme Court and the apportionment contemplated by the Supreme Court was in relation to offshore supplies/services and onshore supplies/services.

However, in the present case, the doctrine of territorial nexus applies and the entire income representing royalty under the agreement is liable to be taxed in India at the appropriate rate, both under the provisions of IT Act, 1961 as well as DTAA between India Australia. The splitting up of such income is not permissible.:ADVANCE RULING AUTHORITY;

2009-TIOL-206-ITAT-LKW.pdf

DCIT, Lucknow Vs Shri Alok Gautam Director (Dated : January 23, 2009)

Income Tax - Assessee invested certain amounts in a company, which were allegedly received as gifts from NRE account - AO negatived assessee's contention and treated the sums as unexplained investment u/s 69 - CIT(A) reversed AO's order - Held, the facts proffered by the assessee to authenticate the gift are not enough to establish either the identity of the donors or their creditworthiness - Held, for proving a gift to be genuine, the assessee/donee is required to prove the existence of natural love and affection, voluntary nature of the gift and occasion for giving gifts, which the assessee failed to do in the present case - Revenue's appeal allowed. :LUCKNOW ITAT;

2009-TIOL-205-ITAT-LKW.pdf

Mohd Shoib Vs DCIT, Lucknow (Dated : November 21, 2008)

Income tax—Assessee transferred his land at a value lesser than that adopted for Stamp Duty purposes—AO calculated capital gains by adopting the valuation as per SVA by applying Sec 50C—CIT(A) confirmed AO's order—Held, assessee has to claim before the AO that valuation as per SVA exceeds the fair market value of the capital asset under transfer and further that such valuation is not in dispute before any appellate authority under Stamp Duty Act—Held, when assessee makes such claim and there is prima-facie material to justify this claim of the assessee then AO is statutorily required to refer the property to the DVO unless he justifies that material submitted by the assessee in this regard are false or it could not lead to the inference that assessee wants him to draw—Assessee's appeal dismissed.:LUCKNOW ITAT;

2009-TIOL-204-ITAT-MUM.pdf

Armour Chemicals Ltd Vs ACIT,Mumbai (Dated : January 27, 2009)

Income Tax - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - Assessee files nil income – AO assesses  profit on the ground of discrepancies in the books of account - CIT and Tribunal dismiss Assessee's Appeals - A.O. levies  penalty - Held, section 271(1)(c) makes it evident that where in the case of any proceedings under the Act, the A.O. is satisfied that any person has concealed the particulars of his income, or has furnished inaccurate particulars of such income penal provisions are attracted. Both the expressions "has concealed" and "has furnished inaccurate particulars" have not been defined in the Act. The net effect of both the expressions is the same. The former is direct, while the latter may be indirect in its execution. It is trite law that the assessment proceeding and the penalty proceedings are distinct and separate proceedings. The findings recorded in the assessment proceedings cannot be conclusive, in the penalty proceedings, though the same may not be irrelevant. It is not legally incumbent on the department, to make any further enquiry where there is any suppression of income, with a view to demonstrating the same as attributable to any dishonest intention, on the part of the assessee. With the deletion of the word "deliberate" from the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Act and the introduction of Explanation - 1 thereto and also having regard to the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dharmendra Textile Processors & Others.   The penalty proceedings are no longer quasi criminal proceedings and, hence, the presence of mens rea is not required to be established. It is no longer essential and necessary for the revenue to go further and establish that there was conscious concealment of particulars of income or a deliberate failure to furnish accurate particulars. It is for the assessee, to prove in the circumstances stated in the Explanation that his failure to return the correct income was not due to fraud or neglect. If fails to do so, he shall be deemed to have concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof and consequently, liable for penalty as contemplated u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. CIT(A) order upheld.:MUMBAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

M/s Hero Cycles Ltd Vs CCE, Ghaziabad (Dated: February 25, 2009)

ST - Cenvat Credit - Assessee avails GTA service - submits certificate of GTA on annual basis - Revenue finds no fault in it but denies credit for lack of certificate on body of consignment notes - held, if there is nothing wrong with the facts and figures given in annual certificate, how can Revenue deny the benefits? - Waiver from pre-deposit granted:DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-531-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Aakriti Cable Network Vs CCE, Jaipur (Dated: February 5, 2009)

ST - Penalty under Sec 76 and 78 - Assessee pleads penalty cannot be imposed under both Sections - held, in view of the High Court decision that the imposition of penalty under both Sections are distinct and separate, imposition of penalty is sustained:DELHI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-535-CESTAT-MAD.pdf + computer story.pdf

M/s HCL Infosystems Ltd Vs CCE, Pondicherry (Dated: February 12, 2009)

Central Excise – valuation – Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Installation charges collected from the buyers are not includable in the transaction value - Installation charges are not collected for the reason of, or in connection with, sale of computers. - Transaction value is the total consideration received by the assessee in exchange for the excisable goods at the time of sale, or later. Installation of computers is not after sales service of the computers sold - excise duty and service tax cannot be levied on the same activity. :CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-534-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Industrial Chemicals & Monomers Ltd Vs CCE, Madurai (Dated: February 11, 2009)

Central Excise – Valuation – cost of transportation from one place of removal (factory) to another place of removal (depot) is not deductible from the assessable value.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-533-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CCE, Chennai Vs M/s Caress Beauty Care Products (P) Ltd (Dated: February 13, 2009)

Central Excise – Valuation – multi piece packages of shampoo cleared in corrugated box containing strips of individually packed pieces of sachets are not to be assessed under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – no merit in revenue appeal.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

CIRCULAR

dgft08cir079.pdf

Terms and conditions to govern EPCG Authorizations issued to DTA unit after conversion from EOU unit.;

dgft08cir078.pdf

Import of waste paper;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-536-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + fine story.pdf

CC, Mumbai Vs M/s Rishi Ship Breakers (Dated: February 25, 2009)

Old and used Vessel imported along with remnant oil on board – vessel allowed out of customs charge for scrapping after assessment under CTH 89.08/27.10 – No question of confiscation or imposition of redemption fine as goods declared as Fuel oil by the importer and ascertained to be Waste oil by the Revenue have already been cleared, consumed or sold after payment of duty and released without any bond/undertaking – Tribunal.

Larger Bench decision in Shiv Kripa Ispat Ltd. vs. CCE & Customs, Nasik and Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vs. Rishi Ship Breakers [ 2009-TIOL-388-CESTAT-MUM-LB ] followed.:MUMBAI CESTAT;