FM gives nod to 16 FDI proposals worth Rs 892 Crore;

Asia-Pacific Trade agreement – Rules of Origin – CBEC amends Rule 8;

Govt fixes uniform price for identical medicines;

Banks, NBFCs directed not to share card-holders' info without consent: Minister;

Selection of new CBEC Chairman: CoS to meet on July 27;

Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism: Panel direction to be binding on AO;

DoT collects Rs 4736 Cr telecom licence fee in first two Quarters last fiscal against Rs 8826 Cr in 2007-08

Sahar Airport Customs seizes gold jewellery worth Rs 16 lakh from pax coming from Dubai

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 17 July.pdf

Customs Tariff - Amendments to HSN –effective 01.01.2012;

BUDGET ANALYSIS

budgetstory51.pdf

Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism: Panel direction to be binding on AO;

CASE LAW

2009-TIOL-346-HC-MUM-SERVICE.pdf

Ravindra Singh Bhat Vs UoI, Mumbai (Dated: July 14, 2009)

Service – Redrawing of seniority list for promotion to the grade of Assistant Commissioner – Department to redraw seniority list based on the principles enunciated by the Madras High Court and the Supreme Court and it cannot be faulted in this regard – On preparation of this list, if there is any grievance between direct recruits or promotees, it is always open for the aggrieved persons to challenge the said final list – During the process of finalisation of seniority list, if any promotions are required to be effected for administrative exigencies, the same can be effected from the final seniority list dated 16th December, 2004 and the draft list dated 28th April, 2005, which are in operation – Objections to redrawn draft seniority list to be called for within two weeks and the final list drawn within a week thereafter

Considering the observations of the Madras High Court, in our view, therefore, there is nothing wrong in the decision of the department to redraw the seniority list in view of the fact that the list is required to be prepared keeping in mind the directions/observations of the Madras High Court in its judgment. The Madras High Court, though has not specifically set aside the seniority list, but has at the same time asked the Department to prepare a seniority list by keeping in mind the observations made in the order and has disposed of the writ petitions accordingly. If the department now wants to redraw the said list on the basis of the principle enunciated in the judgment of the Madras High Court and the Supreme Court, no fault can be found with the action of the department in preparing such a seniority list. All throughout the promotions have been effected on adhoc basis and it is desirable that once and for all an appropriate seniority list be prepared adhering to the said principles. In our view, on preparation of such a list, if there is any grievance between direct recruits or promotees, it is always open for the aggrieved persons to challenge the said final list on the available points…..Para 30.:BOMBAY HIGH COUTRT;

MIXED BUZZ

fdi.pdf

FM gives nod to 16 FDI proposals worth Rs 892 Crore;

mbuzz0663.pdf

Banks, NBFCs directed not to share card-holders' info without consent: Minister;

mbuzz0662.pdf

Govt fixes uniform price for identical medicines: Minister;

mbuzz0661.pdf

Tax information exchange pacts: Belgium meets OECD threshold;

2009-TIOL-84-SC-IT.pdf + sc story.pdf

CIT, Faridabad Vs Ghanshyam ( HUF ) (Dated: July 16, 2009)

Income Tax – Compensation for land acquisition – enhanced compensation (including interest) taxable in the year of receipt, even if receipt is on security; Since the enhanced compensation/consideration (including interest under Section 28 of the 1894 Act) becomes payable/paid under 1894 Act at different stages, the receipt of such enhanced compensation/consideration is to be taxed in the year of receipt subject to adjustment, if any, under Section 155(16) of the 1961 Act, later on. Hence, the year in which enhanced compensation is received is the year of taxability. Consequently, even in cases where pending appeal, the Court/Tribunal/Authority before which appeal is pending, permits the claimant to withdraw against security or otherwise the enhanced compensation (which is in dispute), the same is liable to be taxed under Section 45(5) of the 1961 Act. This is the scheme of Section 45(5) and Section 155(16) of the 1961 Act.: SUPREME COURT;

2009-TIOL-345-HC-P-H-IT.pdf

M/s Emkay Industries Limited Vs CIT , Jalandhar (Dated: July 2, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 68 - AO makes addition for transactions lacking in genuineness - Assessee furnishes additional evidence - AO seeks time to verify it but fails to send his report - CIT(A) allows assessee's appeal - Tribunal remands the matter to the CIT(A) - held, no substance in Revenue's appeal - Appeal dismissed.: PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-344-HC-P-H-IT.pdf

CIT, Chandigarh Vs Dhani Ram (Dated: July 2, 2009)

Income tax - Assessee is fruit seller - Survey - AO finds documents relating to investments made by the assessee - makes additions @ 60% of the peak investment - CIT(A) disagrees to treat investment as income and treats only commission as income and allows addition only @ 5% of the total sale - Tribunal agrees with the CIT(A) - held, there is no valid ground to treat investment as income and the CIT(A) and Tribunal orders are findings of facts - no substantial question of law involved - Revenue's appeal dismissed.: PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-460-ITAT-BANG.pdf

ITO, Bangalore Vs M/s Motorola India Pvt Ltd (Dated: May 01, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 10A - assessee is into development of embedded software - reduces foreign travel expenses and leased lines charges from total turnover before claiming benefits of Sec 10A - held, it is already settled law that what is deducted from export turnover is also to be deducted from total turnover - although such a decision was given in the case of Sec 10B but since the material statutory provisions are identical in section 10A, the ratio of the order would equally apply to the interpretation of section 10A also - applying the ratio of the order of the Special Bench, Revenue's appeal dismissed.: BANGALORE ITAT;

2009-TIOL-459-ITAT-MUM.pdf

Dresser Valve India Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, Mumbai (Dated: April 24, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 115JB - assessee is into the business of manufacturing and trading - makes provision for gratuity - adds back the sume while computing total income - AO finds that the sum is not added back for purpose of Sec 115JB - disallows it - CIT (A) takes the view that the actuarial valuation was not applied while determining the liability on account of gratuity and it is in violation of Accounting Standard-15 (AS-15) - held, the actual quantification is not a legal necessity in matters of ascertainment of the gratuity. The provision of gratuity in the assessee's case is capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty and therefore, it is not a contingent or unascertained liability. Thus, it is a ascertained liability and the same is outside scope of the provisions of clause (c) of the Explanation 1 to section 115JB warranting no addition to the 'books profits'. Assessee's appeal allowed.: MUMBAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-1078-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + cenvat st story.pdf

Sidel India Pvt Ltd Vs CCE & CC, Pune-I (Dated: June 16, 2009)

For the benefit of CENVAT credit on mobile phone service, it is necessary that the assessee should establish that the mobile phones were used exclusively for the purposes connected with their business activities or, directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture/clearance of excisable goods – CESTAT orders pre-deposit.

Tribunal's observations –

+ I have not found prima facie case strong enough to warrant full waiver of pre-deposit. 

+ Apparently, the finding of the lower authorities that the mobile phones were used for both personal and business purposes was arrived at upon verification of the mobile phone bills produced by the assessee. 

+ For the benefit of CENVAT credit on mobile phone service, it is necessary that the assessee should establish that the mobile phones were used exclusively for the purposes connected with their business activities or, directly or indirectly, in or in relation to the manufacture/clearance of excisable goods . 

+ The lower authorities have also relied on the Board's circular dated 23.8.07.  Significantly, the assessee also has chosen to claim under the said circular.  In the circumstances, the relevant para of the Circular has to be examined in this case.  But I have not found any copy of the Circular. 

+ According to the appellant, the crucial finding recorded by the original authority is not supported by evidence. 

+ According to the respondent, that finding was recorded after verification of the mobile phone bills produced by the assessee. 

+ In this scenario, the evidentiary value of the mobile phone bills has also got to be examined. 

+ Unfortunately, not even a specimen copy is available on record.  In the circumstances, I am constrained to observe that the appellant has failed to establish prima facie case.

+ They have not pleaded financial hardships either.: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1077-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

Cochin International Airport Ltd Vs CCE, CC & ST, Cochin (Dated: February 26, 2009 )

Service Tax – Applicability of service tax on royalty charges collected for ground handling, exchange facilities and sale of duty free gold in Airport – Pre-deposit of Rs. 20 Lakhs ordered.: BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1076-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Sharadha Terry Products Ltd Vs CCE, Salem (Dated: April 22, 2009)

Service Tax – No Service Tax on Services received from outside India prior to 18.04.2006 - Indian National Shipowners Association Vs Union of India & Ors . 2008-TIOL-633-HC-MUM-ST , followed - Rajasthan High Court ruling in Union of India Vs Aditya Cement 2008-TIOL-483-HC-RAJ-ST i s not applicable.: CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1075-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Sulabh International Social Service Organization Vs CC, CCE & ST, Hyderabad (Dated: March 2, 2009)

Service tax – Construction of pay and use toilets for public use not liable to service tax – Issue clarified by Board's Circular dated 23.10.2006 – Full waiver of pre-deposit and stay granted.: BANGALORE CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-343-HC-ALL-CX.pdf

M/s Shri Ram Garments & Accessories Vs CCE (Dated: June 25, 2009)

Central Excise – Appeal to Tribunal – pre-deposit – the appellant is allowed to furnish security in form other than cash or bank guarantee. :ALLAHABAD HIGH COUTRT;

2009-TIOL-1074-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + modvat story.pdf

Choksi Enterprise Vs CCE, Mumbai II (Dated: June 11, 2009 )

For a Modvat case of year 1989, the appellate authority chose to apply rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 - Non-application of mind is writ large on the order of the Commissioner(Appeals) – CESTAT remands matter.:MUMBAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1073-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Federal Mogul Tpr India Ltd Vs CCE, Bangalore (Dated: March 12, 2009 )

Central Excise – Credit availed on duty paid by job worker – Once duty has been paid credit can be taken – Prima facie case in favour of appellants – Full waiver of pre-deposit and stay granted .:BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1072-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

Ultra Tech Cement Ltd Tadipatri Mandal Vs CCE, Tirupati (Dated: February 25, 2009 )

Central Excise – No infirmity in assessee taking suo moto credit in CENVAT A/c of amount reversed earlier, after receipt of favourable order from lower authority – Pre-deposit waived and stay granted .:BANGALORE CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

cnt09_079.pdf

dgft08not119.pdf

Commerce Minister to head Board of Trade ;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-1071-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Yashavi Enterprises Vs CC, Chennai (Dated: May 11, 2009)

Customs – DFIA – the polyester fabrics imported are covered by DFIA and are eligible for exemption under Notification 40/2006 Cus dated 01.05.2006 – For export of made ups of man made fabrics of PFY of GSM 130 +/- 10, the imported polyester fabric need not be necessarily of GSM 130+/- 10. .:CHENNAI CESTAT;