Mamta proposes no hike in pax fare and also freight rate;

Kolkata Metro to be extended to more stations;

57 new Trains to be introduced + Dozens of existing trains extended;

Turanto Scheme: Railways to introduce 12 NON-STOP point to point trains;

Izzat Scheme: Rs 225 monthly pass scheme for travel upto 100 km proposed + more concessions to students and minorities;

Railways land bank to be utilised for industrial development;

Container service: Premium service to be introduced;

Optic Fibre Cable Network: Sam Pitroda to head panel to suggest measures for commercial exploitation;

Medical colleges to be set up in association with Railways hospitals on PPP model + Burn wards to be created at hospitals in metros;

Railways to raise battallion of women security personnel;

Double-decker coaches to be introduced for inter-city travelling;

Govt clarifies no stamp duty exemption to SEZ developers for purchase or sale of land outside notified SEZ; notifies guidelines;

Govt to enact Food Security Law to guarantee food to all citizens;

Budget 2009: Remove Cesses and include them in tax rates;

Transfer pricing - price adjustment - CII for hiking price margin to (+/-) 10%;

Rule 6(3) of CCRs - Anomaly in duty rates - Will Finance Bill address this issue?

Hike in petrol prices: A death warrant for premium grade fuel?

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 03 july.pdf

Overlapping duty rates due to multiple exemption notifications – Double whammy for exporters – CBEC should clarify;

rail story.pdf

Rail Budget 2009: A bogie of concessions and populist measures;

kga artiocle.pdf

Hike in petrol prices: A death warrant for premium grade fuel?

budgetrunup24.pdf

Budget 2009: Remove Cesses and include them in tax rates;

budgetrunup23.pdf

Rule 6(3) of CCRs - Anomaly in duty rates - Will Finance Bill address this issue?

RAIL BUDGET 2009

highlights_railway_budget.pdf

Summary: Highlights of Railway Budget – 2009-2010;

rail-budget-speech-0910.pdf

Speech of Kumari Mamata Banerjee Introducing the Railway Budget 2009-2010 On 3rd July 2009

RBI CIRCULAR

rbi09cir002.pdf

Deferred Payment Protocols dated April 30, 1981 and December 23, 1985 between Government of India and erstwhile USSR;

rbi09cir001.pdf

Exim Bank's Line of Credit (LOC) of USD 20 million to Myanma Foreign Trade Bank, Myanmar;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0624.pdf

UN body hails Delhi HC decision to decriminalise homosexuality;

mbuzz0623.pdf

Transfer pricing - price adjustment - CII for hiking price margin to (+/-) 10%;

it09cir05.pdf

Procedure for representation before BIFR and AAIFR;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-17-ARA-IT .pdf + ara story.pdf

Cable & Wireless Networks India Pvt Ltd (Dated: June 30, 2009)

End to end international long distance telecommunication services:

Not royalty; It is well settled that telecom services are standard services.  The arrangement between the applicant and C&W UK is for rendition of service and the applicant pays for the same.  It is for C&W UK to see how it will provide that service.  The applicant is not concerned with the same. The applicant does not pay for using any secret process in the present case. 

Not fee for technical services; First, no technical service is rendered and secondly, there is no transfer of technology. The Revenue also concedes that this is not a case of payment of fees for technical services.

No permanent establishment no tax payable in India by the foreign company and no TDS: the applicant and the branch office of Cable and Wireless India Ltd. are separate legal entities which perform different types of telecom services. The said branch office is not in the business of providing voice / data transmission service: the payments made by the applicant to C&W UK are in the nature of business profits.  In the absence of there being any permanent establishment of C&W UK in India, this income is not at all taxable here.  Since this income is not chargeable to tax under the Act, there is no question of making any deduction at source under section 195.: ADVANCE RULING AUTHORITY;

2009-TIOL-428-ITAT-MUM.pdf

ACIT, Mumbai Vs M/s Godfrey Phillips India Ltd (Dated: March 6, 2009)

Income Tax - deduction u/s 80HHC - CIT(A) directs AO to exclude excise duty and sales tax paid from total turnover for the purpose of deduction u/s 80 HHC - Held, in view of Apex Court decisions the issue is no-longer res-integra. Ground dismissed.

Assessee engaged in the manufacturing and trading of tobacco products - gives certain quantities as samples and writes off  the same - AO makes addition on the ground that assessee fails to discharge his onus by proper explanation and fails  to produce documentary evidence – CIT(A) deletes the said addition with observation that the claim of the assessee  in comparison to the preceding year is not excessive and the distribution of free samples is quite common in this line of business - Held, CIT(A) deletes the above addition without appreciating the fact and without verifying the record - CIT(A) directed to decide the issue afresh - Revenue Ground allowed.:MUMBAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-427-ITAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Noida Toll Bridge Co Ltd Vs DCIT, New Delhi (Dated: April 20, 2009)

Income Tax - Assessee engaged in business of construction of toll bridge roads under "Build-own-operate-transfer" scheme - For the guarantee  of an exit option on deep discount bonds assessee  pays  take-out assistance fees to the company taking the guarantee on behalf of the assessee - Assessee claims this fee as revenue expenditure - AO disallows the claim on the ground that payment which is connected with redemption of DDBs cannot be claimed as a revenue expenses - CIT(A) upheld disallowance - Held, no capital asset can be said to have been acquired by the assessee in the payment of take out assistance fee - In view of decision of Apex court in CIT Vs. Kinetic Engineering Ltd. revenue authorities not right in treating payment of fees paid to financial company as expenditure of capital nature. Assessee Appeal allowed.:DELHI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-426-ITAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Rayala Corporation Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, Chennai (Dated: May 29, 2009)

Income Tax - Assessee company derived income from leasing property - AO brought to tax interest waived by Bank as income chargeable to tax in terms of the provisions of Section 41(1) - Assessee challenged the order on the ground that the return in which the interest income was claimed to be deducted was treaterd as non est by the revenue - CIT(A) rejected the contention and upheld the order - Held, when the return has been treated as defective by the Assessing Officer and despite giving an opportunity the assessee has not rectified the defect, the return shall be treated as an invalid return and the provisions of this Act shall apply as if the assessee had failed to furnish the return - Held, unless an allowance or deduction has been made in an earlier year in respect of loss, expenditure or trading liability, there can be no addition u/s 41(1) - Assessee's appeal partly allowed.:CHENNAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-425-ITAT-DEL.pdf

ACIT, New Delhi Vs Mr Scott R Bayman (Dated: May 14, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 17 - perquisite - Assessee is a foreign national - hired to work in India - employer as per agreement pays to the US Federal Insurance Authorities to obtain social security benefits for the employee - AO treats it as perquisite - CIT(A) deletes the addition - held, it is settled law that since the contribution made by the employer to various welfare schemes which entitles the assessee to receive certain benefits only upon a contingency, is not a taxable perquisite - Revenue's appeal dismissed

Hypo tax - Sec 15 - employer pays for hypo tax and the AO brings the same under the definition of salary u/s 15 - CIT(A) deletes the addition - held, it is also settled in favour of the assessee by a decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal:DELHI ITAT;

sez09ins018.pdf

Govt clarifies no stamp duty exemption to SEZ developers for purchase or sale of land outside notified SEZ; notifies guidelines;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-1005-CESTAT-KOL.pdf

M/s Paradeep Port Trust Vs CCE, BBSR-I (Dated: March 31, 2009)

ST - Port Service - assessee enters into contract with Railways for interconnection - receives payment for terminal service - Revenue for levy of tax on terminal service as part of port service - held, since the Board has accepted the CCE, Chennai order terming it as Business Auxiliary Service, stay granted and Revenue directed not to take coercive action :KOLKATA CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1004-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Rakesh Ahuja & Others Vs CCE, Meerut-II (Dated: May 1, 2009)

ST - pre-deposit - assessee alleges lack of speaking and reasoned order - Adjudicating authority also allegedly fails to examine each agreement before calculating tax element - held, examination of records is prima facie satisfactory - pre-deposit ordered :DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1003-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Hans Colour Lab & Studio Vs CCE, Jaipur-I (Dated: May 27, 2009)

ST - condonation of delay - Assessee pleads an employee of the assessee who received the order misplaced the same and did not inform the management out of fear - held, since the reasons are bona fide the delay is condoned and pre-deposit is waived off as tax is deposited :DELHI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-1008-CESTAT-MAD.pdf + ROM story.pdf

CCE, Coimbatore Vs Shree Narasimha Textiles (P) Ltd (Dated: April 1, 2009)

Central Excise – ROM – Contention that the CESTAT had no jurisdiction to decide the cases involving loss of goods in transit – Held : The Tribunal proceeded on the basis of the submissions made by both sides and held that where goods have been cleared for export and are shown to have been examined, assessed and allowed for export and the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner admitted proof of export, the Department could not raise a claim for duty on the ground that the goods had not been exported - Tribunal did not treat the case before it as one for remission of duty. No error in the earlier order. :CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1006-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Jindal Stainless Ltd Vs CCE& CC, Visakhapatnam (Dated: January 20, 2009)

Central Excise – Valuation – CAS-4 – Goods cleared to sister units - Revenue Neutral - Duty has been paid on the basis of the certificate of the qualified Cost Accountant. The values adopted by the appellant appear to be more than the value in terms of CAS4. Moreover, the entire exercise is revenue neutral because whatever duty is paid at the end of the appellant's factory would be taken as cenvat credit by the sister unit. Hence, the elements of expenditure included by the Commissioner (A) viz., (1) Gratuity; (2) Selling and Packing Expenses; (3) Exchange Rate; (4) preliminary expenses which were written off; (5) interest determined on the loan taken; and (6) Charity and donations, is not proper. ( Para 6.1) :BANGALORE CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

cnt09_077.pdf + cnt09_076.pdf + cnt09_075.pdf + cnt09_074.pdf + cnt09_073.pdf + cnt09_072.pdf + cnt09_071.pdf + cnt09_070.pdf + cnt09_069.pdf

Common adjudicating authority appointed for various parties;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-1007-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + MRP story.pdf

M/s Paros Corporation Vs CC (I), JNCH, Nhava Sheva (Dated: June 11, 2009)

RSP/MRP of Spray paints enhanced after import – Goods notified u/s 4A of the CEA, 1944 - Additional demand of CVD duty sustainable – Pre-deposit ordered of the entire duty together with interest and penalty by CESTAT. :MUMBAI CESTAT;