MoC clarifies on removal of used packing materials from SEZ;

Let good governance begin with the top!

Cabinet okays President's Speech to be delivered in Parliament;

Delhi Govt holds Cabinet meet to seek Special Status for National Capital;

Govt clarifies on procurement of used capital goods from DTA by SEZ units;

Tax Commissioners worldwide join hands to raise revenue to offset fiscal deficits;

Graphic warnings on tobacco packaging can save lives: WHO;

Poland becomes transit point for human trafficking: UN Expert;

Govt intends to introduce content code for TV news channels: Soni;

TIOL COMMENTARY

icecube.pdf

Let good governance begin with the top!

tax story.pdf

Tax Commissioners worldwide join hands to raise revenue to offset fiscal deficits;

RBI NOTIFICATION

RBI Notifi for Guarantees By Banks.pdf

Issue of Guarantees by banks;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0522.pdf

Graphic warnings on tobacco packaging can save lives: WHO;

mbuzz0521.pdf

Poland becomes transit point for human trafficking: UN Expert;

2009-TIOL-319-ITAT-MUM .pdf

DCIT, Mumbai Vs M/s Ford Credit Kotak Mahindra Ltd (Dated: December 04, 2008)

Income Tax - Assessee registered as NBFC is engaged in the business of financing for vehicles and equipments - Penalty u/s 271(1)(c)  levied on additions made in respect of excess depreciation claimed on leased motor cars and Provision for doubtful debts – On the issue of depreciation at 25% CIT(A), in the view of the  judgment of the  Delhi High Court in the case of Electrical Agencies Corporation Vs CIT cancels penalty - On the second issue of levy of penalty on reversal of provisions for NPAs, CIT(A) disagrees with the AO on the ground that initial claims were based on judicial pronouncements and also on the ground that retrospective amendment to section 36(1)(vii) by the finance Act, 2001 with effect from 01-04-1989 could not be anticipated in advance by the assessee – Held, first appellate authority is right in cancelling the penalty for more than one reason. The levy of penalty on both the issues,  not warranted, because  they are highly debatable issues on which more than one legal interpretation could be possible and in view of Apex Court and High Courts decisions Revenue Appeal dismissed.:MUMBAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-318-ITAT-MUM.pdf

M/s ION Exchange (India) Ltd Vs ACIT, Mumbai (Dated: December 18, 2008)

Income Tax - Assessee shows  royalty income, which is after reversal of prior years' royalty income - This reversal of royalty income is  on the ground that the assessee has shown excess royalty income in earlier year and after verifying with the audited accounts of concerned parties the amount of reversal  was written off - AO considers that the assessee cannot write off part of the Royalty income during the year - Held, AO to examine whether the assessee company excess reported the income in the earlier year, the rate at which it accounted the turnover involved, the nature and veracity of the agreements and past practice in this regard, and decide the issue on facts. In case the assessee has indeed excess reported the incomes from Royalty in the earlier year, the same can be reduced in this year, if it is mistake which was corrected. Assessee's ground partly allowed.:MUMBAI ITAT;

sez09ins011.pdf

Procurement of used capital goods from DTA by SEZ Units;

sez09ins010.pdf

Clarification on Rule 49(4)(b) of SEZ Rules, 2006 - removal of used packing materials;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-831-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

CCE, Jaipur Vs M/s Adarsh Marketing (Dated: April 23, 2009)

ST - Assessee claims deduction from gross value of services but fails to substantiate - documents produced before appellate authority - held, since evidence for claiming deduction was not produced before the original authority, the matter remanded for fresh examination:DELHI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-834-CESTAT-AHM.pdf + cenvat story.pdf

M/s Genus Electrotech Ltd Vs CCE, Rajkot (Dated: March 18, 2009)

Central Excise – Assessee cannot be compelled to avail balance CENVAT credit on capital goods when depreciation claimed under IT Act – Refund of duty sanctioned by original authority in terms of Notification No. 39/2001-CE in order – Impugned order disallowing the refund claim set aside: AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-833-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s IOC Ltd Vs CCE, Chennai (Dated: March 25, 2009)

Central Excise – Stay /Dispensation of pre-deposit – denial of credit on inputs short received - Issue in dispute in the present case stands referred to larger Bench of the Tribunal. Hence, waiver of pre-deposit and stay granted. ( Para 1) .:MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2009-TIOL-832-CESTAT-MUM .pdf

Billy Ebby Vs CC, Nhava Sheva (Dated: March 25, 2009)

Import of Motor Vehicle – Type Approval Certificate of an Accredited agency outside the country of origin produced – Confiscation ordered by Commissioner- Appellant applying to the DGFT for relaxation of condition and the competent authority granting the same – No cause for confiscation u/s 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962 – Appeal allowed.:CHENNAI CESTAT;