President summons Rajya Sabha on June 4th;

Budget 2009 may roll out disinvestment of Govt shares in PSUs;

Dr Manmohan Singh's jumbo Council of Ministers sworn in; Portfolios not yet decided;

ICAI budget wish - widen taxbase and rationalise tax laws;

India's elevated position in global IT world should be reflected in defence domain as well: Antony;

Cabinet expansion: Final list of 59 Ministers released - Cabinet slots go to 14, including Dr Farooq Abdullah, Vilasrao Deshmukh, D Maran, A Raja, P K Bansal + Seven get Independent Charge + rest are MoS, including S S Palanimanickam and Shashi Tharoor;

Credit relaxations to borrowers in J & K: RBI extends period of concessions upto March 31, 2010;

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 28 May.pdf

Refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) paid on fuel supplied from depot/warehouse of Domestic Oil Companies to EOUs;

cobweb.pdf

New TDS Regime: TPL bulldozes its way; CBDT looks helpless! Will veteran FM intervene before mess hurts exchequer?

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0518.pdf

India's elevated position in global IT world should be reflected in defence domain as well: Antony;

2009-TIOL-282-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

Jal Hotels Co Ltd Vs ADIT (Dated: May 25, 2009 )

Income tax - Notice u/s 148 - re-assessment initiated - held, since no new material was gathered by the AO which could form 'reason to believe' that some income had escaped assessment, it is a case of change of opinion which is not permitted u/s 147 of the I-T Act - Assessee's appeal allowed: DELHI HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-280-HC-MUM-IT.pdf + it story.pdf

Titanor Components Ltd Vs CIT (Dated: April 29, 2009)

Question of Law pending before High Court – ITAT should have waited for the High Court decision before deciding the identical case for another assessment year - the ITAT here has failed to apply its mind as required and therefore, the very purpose of putting Section 158A in the statute book has been frustrated. Thus salutary provisions made by the Parliament to put an end to unnecessary litigation and to reduce number of cases required to be followed in letter and spirit, have been defeated in the present matter. The Parliament expects the authorities empowered under the said provisions to act in accordance with the spirit of the provisions made the ITAT here has failed to apply its mind as required and therefore, the very purpose of putting Section 158A in the statute book has been frustrated. It is clear that in view of the scheme of Section 158A , it would have been proper for it to wait till the question of law is adjudicated by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the appeals pending before it: BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-279-HC-UTTRANCHAL-IT.pdf

Income tax - Sec 44BB - Assessee is an US-based company, engaged in exploration of mineral oil - gets reimbursement paid for catering charges and fuel - AO includes the sum in gross receipts chargeable to tax - CIT(A) and Tribunal disagree with the AO - held, as per sub-section 2 of Sec 44BB, the amount paid to the assessee for provision of services and facilities in connection with the extraction of mineral oils, whether paid in or outside India, are to be included. The words used in the section include the amount received by the assessee on account of catering charges and fuel as they do form part of ‘services and facilities' in connection with production of the mineral oil - Revenue's appeal allowed: UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-278-HC-AHM-IT.pdf

ITO Vs Sachinam Trust (Dated: March 4, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 271B - Assessee is an association of persons - engaged in the business of money-lending - receives interest payments - files return - AO insists audited accounts u/s 44AB is to be filed as the 'Turnover' of the assessee's business is more than Rs 40 lakh - assessee argues as per published legal opinion it is not the 'Turnover' but the 'Gross Receipts' which is relevant and since its receipts are less than the requisite figure, it is not required to furnish audited accounts - AO imposes penalty - CIT(A) and Tribunal disagree with the AO - held, since the assessee was under bona fide belief that it is not required to furnish audited accounts and the terms 'Turnover' and 'Gross Receipts' are separated by the word 'or', there is no reason for imposing penalty - Revenue's appeal dismissed :GUJARAT HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-277-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

CIT Vs Samtel India Ltd (Dated: May 21, 2009 )

Income tax - Sec 43A - Assessee incures loss on foreign exchange forward contract - claims it as revenue loss - AO treats it as capital loss - CIT(A) holds that if the imported goods are capital goods the loss will be treated as capital loss but since it is import of raw materials and spare parts it is to be treated as revenue loss - Tribunal agrees with the CIT(A) - held, when the assessee had made profit on imported materials, the income was offered to tax - now that the assessee has suffered loss, it cannot be treated differently other than revenue loss - Revenue's appeal dismissed :DELHI HIGH COURT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-819-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CCE, Ludhiana Vs M/s Instant Credit (Dated: April 15 2009)

ST - Business Auxiliary Service - Assessee is a DSA - Central Excise officers visit assessee's premises and detect non-payment of tax - on detection assessee partly pays the tax - Revenue raises demand and levies penalty - held, in view of the Commissioner(A) findings that there was no suppression of value of services provided and evasion of tax cannot be alleged, there is no need to levy penalty - Revenue's appeal dismissed :DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-818-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Bhushan Steels Ltd Vs CCE, Ghaziabad (Dated: April 24 2009)

ST - Cenvat credit - Assessee is a manufacture - delivers goods upto the premises of customers - treats transporation as input service - held, since the Board's circular on this issue was not brought to the notice of the Commissioner(A) although the same was issued earlier, and also the decision of the P&H High Court on this issue, the matter is remanded for fresh appreciation of facts : DELHI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-823-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + magnet story.pdf

CCE, Thane-II Vs M/s Permanent Magnets Ltd (Dated: March 25, 2009)

Rule 9 of CER, 2002 – De-registration of certificate - When appeals are pending, it cannot be said that there were enforceable dues to the government as on the date of surrender of registration certificate – Tribunal.:MUMBAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-822-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd Vs CCE, Hyderabad (Dated: February 24, 2009)

Central Excise - Whether the activity carried out in the depot or in the job workers place, is at the behest of the customer or not has to be considered from the evidences available on record - Pre-deposit ordered - CESTAT.:BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-821-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

CCE, Thane-II Vs M/s Aries Pharmaceuticals (Dated: April 24, 2008)

Assessee had maintained separate inventory of the Cenvatable inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods in Form-IV Register as per the requirement of the Central Excise Authorities, Bin Cards and Batch Cards as per the requirements of FDA and in stray cases where credit was taken on common inputs, they have reversed the appropriate Cenvat credit, and informed in their RG 23A Part II Register - assessee has substantially complied with the provisions of maintaining the two separate accounts for inputs going in exempted and dutiable products - no cause for paying 8% amount u/r 57CC/AD of CER, 1944 - LB decision in M/s. Nicholas Piramal (I) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Thane-I 2008-TIOL-1877-CESTAT-Mum-LB relied upon.

Limitation - It is also not a case of suppression as the copies of the RG 23A Part II along with the RT12 returns were submitted to the Range office - thus the fact of proportionate reversal of credit was made known to the Department - Extended period not applicable - Viewed from any angle case does not stand - Revenue appeal dismissed.:MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

ctariff09_055.pdf

Govt imposes final anti-dumping duty on CFL imports;

dgft08pn182.pdf

Error in PN 165 corrected;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-281-HC-DEL-CUS.pdf + jail story.pdf

Satpal Juneja Vs DRI (Dated: April 29, 2009)

Undertrial in NDPS case does not return to jail on completion of Interim Bail – DRI to apprehend and put back in jail bail jumpers: This Court is also not satisfied with the explanation that the DRI cannot itself take steps to ensure that undertrials involved in serious offence under the NDPS Act, upon their jumping the bail granted to them, are apprehended and put back to the jail. If this explanation were to be accepted by this Court it would mean that the system of prosecuting offenders for grave offences under the NDPS Act will stand severely challenged since the presence of the accused at the trial cannot be ensured. It is plain that the officers of the DRI have not been able to coordinate with the jail authorities in ascertaining which of the undertrials facing prosecution under the NDPS Act are required to surrender on a daily basis and which have not . The order dated 25th February 2009 passed by this Court was in the presence of the learned counsel for the DRI . Therefore there could not have been any doubt that the interim bail granted to the Petitioner was expiring on 28th February 2009. This Court is particularly perturbed by the fact that till this Court by its order dated 13th April 2009 asked it to verify the particulars, the DRI did not take any steps:DELHI HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-820-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Rajeswari Graphics Vs CC, Tuticorin (Dated: December 31, 2008)

Customs – Import of second hand photocopiers – 10% penalty reasonable.:CHENNAI CESTAT;