Tax Haven issue: Should Govt continue to allow super rich to behave like East India Company? (See 'Common Basket')

OECD removes Switzerland from its 'gray list' of tax havens; (See 'Common Basket')

Impact of Circular 108/2009-ST - Unsettling settled position? (See 'Common Basket')

Pharma exports registers 29% growth rate last fiscal; (See 'Common Basket')

Full Text of PM's remarks at G-20 meeting at Pittsburgh: plenary session;

Canada likely to sign nuclear deal with India;

Introductory statement by Prime Minister at press conference;

India and Australia agree to work together for FTA;

US assures NPT not directed against India;

Dorjee Khandu elected unopposed as Arunachal CM for third time;

Economic decision making – no country however powerful has monopoly - Manmohan;

G20 Top Economic Forum: China, India Emerging Powers;

India's no to fossil fuel subsidy;

TIOL COMMENTARY

spl down.pdf

Tax Haven issue: Should Govt continue to allow super rich to behave like East India Company?

swiss story.pdf

OECD removes Switzerland from its 'gray list' of tax havens;

stgst.pdf

Impact of Circular 108/2009-ST - Unsettling settled position?

pharma sector story.pdf

Pharma exports registers 29% growth rate last fiscal;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz0890.pdf

Full Text of PM's remarks at G-20 meeting at Pittsburgh: plenary session;

mbuzz0889.pdf

Introductory statement by Prime Minister at press conference;

mbuzz0888.pdf

Economic decision making – no country however powerful has monopoly - Manmohan;

mbuzz0887.pdf

G20 Top Economic Forum: China, India Emerging Powers;

mbuzz0886.pdf

India's no to fossil fuel subsidy;

2009-TIOL-589-ITAT-NAGPUR.pdf

Western Coalfields Ltd Vs ACIT, Nagpur (Dated: June 30, 2009)

Income Tax - Assessee is a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd (CIL) - makes a provision for incremental wages on the basis of directions received from CIL., the holding company after the closure of the F.Y. but before the finalization of audited account. The provision made at 10% of the basic pay on the basis of past history, subject to the final agreement under negotiation.  A.O., forms an opinion that since the agreement had not been signed, hence, this liability had neither accrued nor crystallized in the year under consideration and, therefore, in the nature of contingent liability, hence, not allowable. CIT(A) confirms the decision of the A.O - Held , such provision needs to be recognized in the year under consideration. Making of such provision is also in consonance with the principle of matching of cost with the Revenue. The impugned amount is allowable as an expenditure in the year under consideration.

Explanation 1 to  section 37(1) - On the issue of CIT(A)  confirming the disallowance in respect of overloading charges, under loading charges and credit notes issued by the assessee to its customers for stones, shells, etc., contained in the consignment sent to them at various point of time-Held, all the three charges have been clubbed together without analyzing the exact nature of these items. As far as underloading charges and credit notes are concerned, these expenses have been incurred by the assessee as a consequence of agreement with its customers and these have not been paid to Railways like overloading charges, hence, at the very outset, these are not covered within the ambit of Explanation 1 to section 37(1). The fact of incurrence of these expenses for the purpose of business is also not in doubt. These are allowable expenses as incurred for the purpose of business. Grounds no.5 and 6 allowed. As regards overloading charges the object of Explanation 1 also supports the claim of the assessee as these expenses are not of the nature of any illegal / unlawful expenditure. Ground 4 allowed. Assessee Appeal allowed.:NAGPUR ITAT;

2009-TIOL-588-ITAT-MUM.pdf

M/s Akshnishit Investments & Trading P Ltd Vs ITO, Mumbai (Dated: May 5, 2009)

Income Tax—Assessee, an investment company, claimed the profit on mutual funds under the head 'capital gains'—AO held that the assessee had traded in mutual funds and therefore the profit in respect of the transaction was assessable business profit—CIT(A) dismissed assessee's appeal—Held, the frequency of the transaction in the year under appeal is not as a result of actual purchase and sale but transfer from one fund to another fund and the profits thereof has been assessed as profits on investments—Held, intention of the assessee to trade in the units of mutual funds is absent in this case and, thus, profit should be assessable under the head 'capital gains' and not under the head 'profits and gains of business'—Assessee's appeal allowed.:MUMBAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-1530-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE & CC, Vapi Vs M/s Harsiddhi Motors (Dated: July 27, 2009)

Service Tax - Demand - Invoking of provisions - Limitation - Whether the show cause notice issued after the amendment, invoking the pre-amended provisions for the period prior to amendment can be held to be valid for the purpose of demand of duty. HELD - Even though the period of dispute is during the time of pre-amended provisions show cause notice issued after the amendment has to invoke the amended provisions for the purpose of demand of duty. In this case the amended provisions of Section 73, which is pari materia with Section 11A, have not been invoked and therefore the demand is barred by limitation. Show cause notice does not put assessee to notice specifically as to which of the various commissions or omissions stated in the proviso to Section 11A(1) of Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944 have been committed. Demand barred by limitation. (Para 1 & 3) :AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1527-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

Mukesh & Associates Vs CCE, Salem (Dated: August 5, 2009)

Service Tax – Stay / dispensation of pre-deposit - relevant date for taxable services - the tax is required to be paid as and when values for such services are received. Prima facie, the valuation of the same and the tax rates applicable have to be determined in accordance with the legal provisions in force at the time the taxable value is received – pre-deposit ordered.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-1529-CESTAT-BANG.pdf + Kerala story.pdf

M/s Kerala Footwear Products Vs CCE, Calicut (Dated: April 21, 2009)

Central Excise – Synthetic Rubber Master Batch used within factory of production classifiable under 4005.20, to be considered for re-computing duty demand – Duty demand based on incomplete report of chemical examiner for Colour Master Batch not justiciable, liable to be set aside – When issues involved are based on interpretation of excise law/classification under tariff longer period not invocable – When facts are in the knowledge of department, second SCN invoking extended period not sustainable – All penalties set aside

Appeal allowed by way of remand

Central Excise – Whether strap-plaps which are loosely joined bunch of 16 individual straps formed as such in the mould classifiable under heading 4008.29 in terms of M/s Premier Footwear Products (P) Ltd. vs. CCE, Coimbatore 2006-TIOL-1736-CESTAT-MAD ; or under heading 6401.92 as parts of Hawai chappal in terms of Rule 2(a) of Rules for interpretation of the Central Excise Tariff and ratio of Apex Court's decision in Phoenix international Ltd. vs. Collector of Customs, Raigad 2002-TIOL-746-SC-CUS

Matter referred to Larger Bench :BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1528-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

Jain Vanguard Polybutylene Ltd Vs CCE, Nashik (Dated: June 19, 2009)

Issue - Refund of unutilized cenvat credit on the ground of closure of factory - Rule 5 of the CCR, 2004 cannot be employed for rejection – Following Karnataka HC decision in Union of India Vs. Slovac India Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. (SLP against which was dismissed by SC) refund to be allowed. :MUMBAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2009-TIOL-1532-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + rajendra story.pdf

Rajendra Bajaj Vs CC, Mumbai (Dated: July 23, 2009)

Application for early hearing – Objections raised by Revenue are frivolous and hence rejected – CESTAT accedes to party's request. :MUMBAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-1531-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CC, Kandla Vs M/s C J Shah & Co (Dated: June 30, 2009)

Customs - Import - Valuation - Transaction value - The price declared by the respondents is in consonance with the prices quoted in the PLATTS. Revenue has not rebutted the evidence taken into cognizance by the Commissioner (Appeals). Revenue appeal dismissed. (Para 2):AHMEDABAD CESTAT;