Govt halves TDS rates on rental income and contractor; No education cess on TDS on non-salary payments by domestic Cos;

Receiving gift produces happines but Budget 2009 does not promise so!

Let's thank top babus for removal of 10% surcharge; may cost exchequer Rs 3200 Crore;

I-T Act finally defines 'manufacture'; Double benefits for Voluntary Retirement Scheme denied;

Refund of import duties: An attempt to adopt international norms under revised Kyoto Convention - some ;empirical problems

Customs Tariff Act, 1975 goes for major retrospective amendments Ð aimed at providing machinery provisions for recovery of allied duties of Customs and imposition of penalties ;

Income tax: Retrospective empowerment to issue Warrant to Search u/s 132 ;

India may be one but service tax has two Indias: one for export of services another for import of services!

See 'Budget Analysis' for views of India's top Tax Experts like V Lakshmikumaran + S Thirumalai + M G Venugopalan';

Budget introduces Allotment of Document Identification Number (DIN) by Income Tax Department ;

Half baked approach by TRU in addressing valuation issue under Works Contract Service ;

Budget: Service Tax Exemption Notifications - An overview;

Relief for Transporters: Sec 40A(3A) - Cash limit hiked from Rs 20000 to Rs 35000;

Budget grants LLP tax status equal to partnership firm;

Legal Consultancy Service – whether appearance before the Settlement Commission is outside the purview of Service Tax levy?

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 07 July .pdf

Allotment of Document Identification Number;

stgst.pdf

Service Tax on 'Legal Consultancy Service' - First define the undefined words and phrases;

BUDGET ANALYSIS

budgetstory34.pdf

Receiving gift produces happines but Budget 2009 does not promise so!

budgetstory33.pdf

Union Budget 2009: Customs – A balanced act ;

budgetstory32.pdf

Budget proposals for Aam Aadmi ;

budgetstory31.pdf

Union Budget 2009 - Central Excise - A mixed bag ;

budgetstory30.pdf

Let's thank top babus for removal of 10% surcharge; may cost exchequer Rs 3200 Crore ;

budgetstory29.pdf

I-T Act finally defines 'manufacture'; Double benefits for Voluntary Retirement Scheme denied;

budgetstory28.pdf

Customs Tariff Act, 1975 goes for major retrospective amendments – aimed at providing machinery provisions for recovery of allied duties of Customs and imposition of penalties ;

budgetstory27.pdf

Govt halves TDS rates on rental income and contractor; No education cess on TDS on non-salary payments by domestic Cos ;

budgetstory26.pdf

Service tax on legal consultancy: Will it also cover foreign law firms?

budgetstory25.pdf

Issue White Paper on GST ;

budgetstory24.pdf

Half baked approach by TRU in addressing valuation issue under Works Contract Service ;

budgetstory23.pdf

Refund of import duties: An attempt to adopt international norms under revised Kyoto Convention - some empirical problems ;

budgetstory22.pdf

Income tax: Retrospective empowerment to issue Warrant to Search u/s 132 ;

budgetstory21.pdf

Budget: Service Tax Exemption Notifications - An overview ;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0633.pdf

Security Council structure must evolve to truly reflect global aspirations;

mbuzz0632.pdf

UN Commission on global food norms takes action against dangerous bacteria;

2009-TIOL-436-ITAT-DEL.pdf + metro story.pdf

Delhi Metro Rail Corpn Ltd Vs JCIT, New Delhi (Dated: May 15, 2009)

Dispute between State PSUs and Central Departments – Delhi Metro is hybrid PSU - COD clearance required: The decision of Delhi High Court is that such approval is required when there is a dispute between the Income-tax Department and the undertaking of the State Government. However, the assessee is a joint venture, wherein Central Government and the State Government hold equal shares. Thus, it is what we may call a hybrid PSU. The question is whether in case of disputes between the Income-tax Department and the hybrid PSU, the previous approval of the COD is required? Such permission is required in case of a PSU of the Central Government or the undertaking of the State Government. Therefore, there is no reason to come to a conclusion that such an approval is not required in case of a hybrid PSU.:DELHI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-435-ITAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Saura Trade Credits Pvt Ltd Vs ITO, Coimbatore (Dated: November 04, 2008)

Profit on sale of shares / mutual funds – whether Business income or capital gains.

Assessee treated the surplus arising from transfer of shares and mutual funds as long term capital gains on the ground that they were holding such assets as investments. AO analysed the holding pattern, period of holding, frequency of transactions etc. and held it as business activity. On appeal, Tribunal held that the only activity carried on by the assessee is purchase and sale of shares and mutual funds and they have not carried out any other activity. The proportion of the dividend income received by the assesee was so negligible when compared to the quantum of profit earned out of purchase and sale of shares / mutual funds and those dividends were only incidental to the holding of such assets at the time of declaring the dividends. Action of the AO upheld

Appeal by assessee dismissed. :CHENNAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-434-ITAT-MAD .pdf

DCIT, Chennai Vs M/s A V Thomas Leather & Allied Products Ltd (Dated: March 20, 2009)

Income tax - Whether loss suffered in 10A unit can be set off against profit earned in non-10A units – According to Tribuanl, the amended provisions of sec. 10A w.e.f. 1.4.2001 provides for a deduction from total income and not exemption – Loss from a 10A eligible unit is available for set off u/s 70 and 71. :CHENNAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-1022-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

Nokia India (P) Ltd Vs CST, New Delhi (Dated: May 25, 2009)

ST - Repair and maintenance service - Assessee pleads limitation and argues demand is time-barred as the SCN is based on materials gathered during search way back in 2001 - held, going by the reasoned and speaking order of the Commissioner (A) who has also considered the time-bar aspect, a pre-deposit of Rs 50 lakh is justifiable - Assessee's appeal disallowed :DELHI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1021-CESTAT-KOL.pdf

M/s NTPC Sail Power Company Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Bolpur (Dated: May 7, 2009)

ST - Business Auxiliary Service - Assessee argues since electricity is an excisable product, serivice tax cannot be levied on it by treating it as service - Revenue pleads that clause (ii) of Sec 2(f) is not satisfied by the assessee, therefore it cannot be considered as a manufactured product - held, it is a settled law that electricity is a manufactured product, and the definiton of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is an inclusive definition and therefore, it is very clear that it is not necessary that all the inclusive definitions should be satisfied together in any particular case - Thus, it is not covered under the BAS - Assessee's appeal allowed:KOLKATA CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-329-HC-MUM-CX.pdf + excise story.pdf

Ms Usha B Agarwal Vs CCE, Mumbai-VII (Dated: June 16, 2009)

Central Excise Appeals – ‘person aggrieved': Buyer feels excise duty is not payable, but manufacturer does not file appeal in Tribunal – Buyer entitled to file appeal as it has no other remedy: the legislature has used the expression any person aggrieved and not the word “manufacturer”. If it was the intention of the legislature that the expression any person has to be read as only “manufacturer” then there was no reason for the legislature to use the expression “any person”. Once the legislature has used an expression which has received judicial interpretation then that interpretation will have to be followed to find the object and the reason for using the expression. The Appellant has demonstrated the prejudice that would be occasioned. It is in that context that the court rightly had directed the appellant to move an application to seek relief to prefer an appeal. The tribunal unfortunately misread the judgment of this court and proceeded to examine whether an appeal itself lies. : BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-1023-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

M/s System Engineers Vs CCE, Pune-I (Dated: May 1, 2009)

Refund of amount paid during investigations is also to be subjected to the test of unjust enrichment in view of Apex Court decision in Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandal Ltd. [ 2005-TIOL-48-SC-CX-LB ] – ROM application cannot seek to reargue the matter or call upon the Tribunal to review the basis of its decision – ROM dismissed. :MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2009-TIOL-1020-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Sagar Enterprises Vs CC, Tuticorin (Dated: April 6, 2009)

Customs – Appeal to Tribunal – Condonation of delay – Bonafide belief - The appellants have successfully contested the order of the original authority and preferred claim for consequential relief. The appellants had canvassed sanction of the claim before the original authority and challenged the rejection of the claim before the Commissioner (Appeals). The impugned orders advised the party in the Preamble that an appeal has to be filed within a period of three months from the date of communication of the said order before the CESTAT if they felt aggrieved. In the circumstances, the plea that the appellants were under a bonafide belief that no appeal was required to be filed against the impugned orders is not acceptable. (Para 3) :CHENNAI CESTAT;