Flight cancellation threat: Govt asks airlines to comply with aviation rules within 48 hours;

National Population Register: Data collection of all coastal villages completed, says MHA;

Rupee export credit for exports: RBI extends interest subvention of 2% upto March 31, 2010;

Monthly returns filed with Central Excise cannot be disclosed to applicant as it can cause commercial harm to third-party and compromise its competitive interest vis-a-vis others - CIC rejects appeal citing section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act;

Mr V Sridhar is new CBEC Chairman; Mr Y G Parande joins as third new Member of CBEC; Other two are Mr P N Vittal Dass and Mr S D Majumder;

India sumbits 12 papers on official stand on Climate Change;

FICN issue: RBI clarifies only four notes in one million notes in circulation;

Strike threat by private airlines: Govt invites Federation for dialogue; Air India not to join strike;

TIOL COMMENTARY

ice cube.pdf

Pakistan & China must give up their territorial designs against India;

cic story.pdf + cic order.pdf

Monthly returns filed with Central Excise cannot be disclosed to an applicant as it can cause commercial harm to third-party and compromise its competitive interest vis-à-vis others – CIC rejects appeal citing section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act;

RBI NOTIFICATION

rbi_notification.pdf

Rupee export credit for exports: RBI extends interest subvention of 2% upto March 31, 2010;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0714.pdf

India takes 15 initiatives on Climate Change;

mbuzz0713.pdf

Breast-feeding saves lives in emergencies: WHO;

mbuzz0712.pdf

India sumbits 12 papers on official stand on Climate Change;

mbuzz0711.pdf

FICN issue: RBI clarifies only four notes in one million notes in circulation;

2009-TIOL-20-ARA-IT.pdf + ara story.pdf

M/s SPAHI PROJECTS PVT LTD (Dated: July 29, 2009)

Indo-South Africa DTAA and TDS u/s 195 - Applicant appoints a commission agent in South Africa for procuring confirmed orders of its products - commission to be paid on such sales - Is TDS u/s 195 deductible on such payments?

Assessee is an Indian manufacturer of pesticides - enters into contract with a South African trading company for marketing and promotion of its product - 3% commission to be paid to the non-resident on confirmed sales - business connection - Applicant states that the non-resident has no business connection in India nor any PE - further contends that since the commission paid to the non-resident is business income, it is not taxable under Article 7 of the DTAA - Held, since the non-resident has no business connection with India nor owns any PE, its income is not chargeable to tax in India either under DTAA or u/s 9(1) of the Income Tax Act - the applicant is not under obgligation to deduct tax at source u/s 195 of the I-T Act: AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS;

2009-TIOL-487-ITAT-MUM.pdf

M/s Mahindra British Telecom Ltd Vs DCIT, Mumbai (Dated: March 20, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 263 – Assessee claims expenditure towards provision of Rs.8 crores representing management incentive/ variable performance – CIT considered this expenditure as being in the nature of bonus or commission covered u/s 43B of the Act – Held, that the order of the Income Tax Officer in respect which the CIT can exercise his power under section 263 should not only be erroneous but also prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue - CIT has not demonstrated as to how the prejudice has been caused to the Revenue - Even if it were to be held that the provision of Rs.8 crores was in the nature of bonus or commission and that section 43B was attracted, the disallowance was not warranted, as the assessee had made the entire payment before filing of the return - Directing the Assessing Officer to verify the claim could be given in exercise of power under section 263, but if the very jurisdiction of the CIT did not exist for the reason that there was no loss to the Revenue by the reason of non-application of mind of the Assessing Officer, then there is lack of jurisdiction.

Income tax - Sec 263 – CIT stated that AO while computing deduction u/s 10A has mistakenly taken into account the total turnover excluding expenses incurred for telecommunication charges and foreign exchange expenses in providing technical services outside India which was considered prejudicial to the interest of revenue – Held, that the view taken by the AO, supported by various decisions of the Tribunal, cannot be said to be erroneous. : MUMBAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-1172-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Pratik Enterprises Vs CCE & C, Vapi (Dated: July 1, 2009)

ST - C & F Service - Assessee is a proprietory firm - Search conducted - demand raised and penalty imposed - held, since the assessee is an individual and cooperated with the investigation and deposited tax with interest, a lenient view on penalty is called for - a fit case for invocation of Sec 80 - penalties set aside - Assessee's appeal allowed: AHMEDABD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1171-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

CCE, Belgaum Vs M/s Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd (Dated: February 17, 2009)

Service Tax – When service tax itself is not payable, interest demand not sustainable – No merit in revenue appeal: BANGALORE CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-1173-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

CCE & C, Hyderabad Vs M/s Jay Engineering Works Ltd (Dated: April 24, 2009)

Central Excise – Valuation – Section 4 vis-à-vis Section 4 – electric fans supplied to Government Departments under DGS&D rate contract are assessable under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – Commissioner (A) order setting aside the demand of duty under Section 4 is upheld: BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1169-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Jocil Ltd Vs CC & CCE, Guntur (Dated: February 17, 2009)

Central Excise – Suo moto availment of credit of excess duty paid in PLA – When there is no malafide intent penalty under Rule 25 not leviable :BANGALORE CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2009-TIOL-88-SC-NDPS.pdf + ndps story.pdf

D Ramakrishnan Vs Intelligence Officer, Narcotic Control Bureau (Dated: July 27, 2009)

NDPS - licenses under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, not valid for export of prohibited drug s: Section 80 of the Act provides that the provisions of the Act or the rules made thereunder are in addition to, and not in derogation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 or the rules made thereunder . Drugs and Cosmetics At, 1940 does not deal with exports. The provisions of Customs Act do. The licensees, therefore, were, thus, required to comply with the specific requirements of the Act and the Rules. It is not denied or disputed that the appellant neither applied for nor granted any authority to export by the Narcotic Commissioner or any other Officer who is authorized in this behalf. : SUPREME COURT;

2009-TIOL-1174-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

A S Lari & Co Vs CC (Import), Nhava Sheva (Dated: June 11, 2009)

Refund of redemption fine and penalty – P&L account shows redemption fine and penalty as items of expenditure - Bar of unjust enrichment applicable – there is an onerous burden on the party to show that burden of fine and penalty was not passed on to buyers of goods –- cases cited factually distinguishable - Appeal dismissed: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1170-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Component Speciality (India) Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Bangalore (Dated: April 29, 2009)

100% EOU – demand of duty on the capital goods imported duty free – demand is premature as the goods were not removed from the warehouse, but only shifted to another premises for repair – Notification 52/2003 Cus dated 31.3.2003 :BANGALORE CESTAT;