|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
CBEC grants Sec 11C benefits to small packing materials manufacturers using brand name or trade name of others; CBEC lays down procedure and guidelines for import of diamonds for certification and grading and re-export; Reimbursement of Education Cess paid on Excise Duty for supplies under deemed exports: DGFT says its decision dated April 11, 2008 allowing refund is clarificatory in nature ; CBEC to give comprehensive presentation on GST to Finance Minister today; Customs exchange rate: Swedish Kroner rate amended; New Direct Taxes Code: Govt has open mind to changes in Code, says FM; Govt to develop Jaipur-Delhi-Agra as golden triangle tourist circuit; Govt to conduct Survey to assess rural steel consumption; UN gives nod to energy-efficient Mobile Charger for worldwide use; CBI smells rat in Sanchar Bhawan; raids many officials; |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| Dear Member, Sending the following files: |
||
|
 |
 |
|
|
TIOL COMMENTARY Do you have a Chinese Mobile Phone? You may be in for trouble. DGFT prohibits import of CDMA Mobile Phones without ESN; Software - A hard nut to crack; When Vivek Talwar '(s)tyles' his way to DRI, Aiyesha Bhi hota hai ! MIXED BUZZ Govt to develop Jaipur-Delhi-Agra as golden triangle tourist circuit; Govt to conduct Survey to assess rural steel consumption; CBI smells rat in Sanchar Bhawan; raids many officials; UN gives nod to energy-efficient Mobile Charger for worldwide use; |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
M/s Sabet India Private Ltd Vs ACIT (Dated: October 8, 2009) Income tax - Writ - Sec 147 - Assessee constructs a building for office, warehouse and production - retun filed - AO refers the investment in construction issue to Valuation Cell - DVO enhances the sum invested in the construction of the building - AO makes addition u/s 69 as undisclosed investment - held, in view of the Apex Court decision in the case of Amia Paul, no reference can be made to the valuation cess for the purpose of determining the investment in the building. The DVO report may form the basis only for computation of capital gains tax. Since the Revenue has no material in possession to make additions, the assessee's appeal allowed:ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT; CIT Vs M/s Maggronic Devices Pvt Ltd (Dated: October 7, 2009) Income tax - Sec 9(1)(vi) - Assessee-company is engaged in the manufacture of audio magnetic sound heads - enters into an agreement with a Singapore company for the supply of plant knowhow and product knowhow - assessee is to make payments in three instalment upto the point of commercial production - applies for NOC to make remittances without TDS - whether the payment made by the assessee to the non-resident company is in the nature of fee for technical services or royalty, taxable in India u/s 9(1)(vii) or (vi) Assessee enters into a comprehensive agreement - if required, the foreign company to make available the services of its trained technicians for setting up the plant and machinery - payment is to be made in three instalments - AO declines to issue the NOC by holding the payment as fees for technical services - CIT(A) allows the assessee's appeal and directs the AO to issue the NOC - Tribunal holds that the agreement stipulates two types of services 1) plant knowhow and 2) product knowhow - since the payment is made for acquiring the plant knowhow in the form of technical and engineering data, design, drawings, sketches and photographs, it is a case of outright purchase and no income of the foreign company arises or accures in India - the sum paid to the non-resident cannot be treated as royalty even in terms of the extended definition of royalty - a reference is made to the High Court by the Tribunal HC underlines more facts of the case - Two of the Directors of the assessee-company travels to Singapore for the purchase of plant know how - collects the technical documents including designs, photographs etc. from the Singapore Company - On receipt of the data, designs and drawings, the first instalment of payment is made - the agreement is valid for a period of five years and after its expiry, the data and technical knowhow to remain the property of the assessee for its full and free use Having heard the arguments of the parties the HC holds that, ++ Clause 10(a) of the agreement clearly shows that the title in the documents stood transferred to the Indian Assessee and it became the owner and could use the same for any purpose albeit after a period of five years. ++ Tribunal is right in holding that the Indian assessee had purchased Plant Know How at Singapore and the amount being paid was on account of purchase of the plant and not as royalty. ++ It may be true that the foreign company was required to provide technical assistance, if required, but the fact is that no such technical assistance was ever required nor was provided. The payment was the price of the documents purchased, and the same would not fall within the meaning of royalty. ++ The foreign company has no business in India. It has no plant in India. The transaction takes place in Singapore. The agreement is also entered into between the parties at Singapore and the documents are handed over to the representative of the Indian company at Singapore. This is a case of outright purchase of plant know how and not a case of transfer of interest. Reference answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.:HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT; CIT Vs Hybrid Rice International Pvt Ltd (Dated: October 9, 2009) Income tax - Sec 32 - Assessee is in the business producing superior quality hybrid seeds - claims depreciation on actual costs of paddy seeds - AO asks the assessee to furnish a depreciation chart on the basis of written down value - Assessee fails to do so as it had earlier claimed its income as agricultural income exempt from tax but the same was held by the Tribunal as not agricultural income - Assessee insists on allowance of depreciation on actual basis - AO disallows but the Tribunal allows the appeal - held, depreciation is a privilege which can be chosen to be exercise or not by the assessee - since the assessee has not exercised such an option in the past, it cannot be disallowed - the actual cost incurred by the assessee much before becoming an assessee can still be treated as an actual cost to the assessee when depreciation has to be claimed - Revenue's appeal dismissed:DELHI HIGH COURT; Ms Farah Khan Vs ACIT, Mumbai (Dated: July 3, 2009) Income tax - held, anything disclosed in the return of income prior to the date of search is a matter of regular assessment and outside the purview of block assessment. Transactions which are already disclosed in regular return filed prior to the search cannot be considered in block assessment.:MUMBAI ITAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
|
|
SERVICE TAX SECTION 2009-TIOL-1696-CESTAT-BANG.pdf M/s Country Club ( India ) Pvt Ltd Vs CCE & CST, Hyderabad (Dated: May 19, 2009) Service tax – Charges collected from members towards allotment of plots not connected with services of club, prima facie strong case on merits – Claim of tax paid on health and fitness service to be scrutinized in detail for all centres across the country – Pre-deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs ordered :BANGALORE CESTAT; 2009-TIOL-1695-CESTAT-BANG.pdf Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd Vs CCE, Visakhapatnam (Dated: March 18, 2009) Service tax – Assessee entitled to benefit of 75% abatement in terms of Notification 32/2004-ST while availing benefit of GTA services for transport of goods manufactured by them – Impugned order set aside:BANGALORE CESTAT; 2009-TIOL-1694-CESTAT-BANG.pdf M/s Tata Auto Comp Systems Ltd Vs CCE, Bangalore-II (Dated: June 12, 2009) Service tax – CENVAT Credit of service tax paid on transportation services provided by assessee to pick up and drop their staff not deniable – No merit in Appellate Commissioner's order which relied on his previous order already set aside by Tribunal:BANGALORE CESTAT; M/s BSR Enterprises Vs CST, Chennai (Dated: August 6, 2009) Service Tax – demand has been quantified merely on the basis of the figures in the Balance Sheet – matter remanded to examine the applicability of notification No.12/2003 and question of limitation.:CHENNAI CESTAT;
CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION NOTIFICATION CBEC grants Sec 11C benefits to small packing materials manufacturers using brand name or trade name of others; CASE LAWS 2009-TIOL-1703-CESTAT-MAD.pdf + NCR Corporation Story.pdf M/s NCR Corporation India Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Pondicherry (Dated: June 30, 2009) Central Excise – Valuation - Stay / Dispensation of pre-deposit – value of software loaded in the ATMs is prima facie includable in the assessable value of the ATMs from 1.1.2007 in view of the deletion of the Chapter Note 6 to Chapter 85 – Pre-deposit of Rs three crores ordered.:CHENNAI CESTAT; Indian Oil Corpn Ltd Vs CCE, Mumbai - II (Dated: August 13, 2009) Some production of HSD oil cleared to Indian Navy under exemption notification while the rest cleared on payment of duty to private customers – Whether rule 6 of CCR, 2004 come into play or does the rule work only when dutiable and final products are different – in any case amount paid by appellant – Pre-deposit waived and stay ordered from recovery of balance amount.:MUMBAI CESTAT; M/s Gulf Oil Corpn Ltd Vs CCE, Ranchi (Dated: August 5, 2009) Central Excise – In the absence of provisional assessment, if assessee pays higher duty and issues credit notes subsequently, refund claim hit by unjust enrichment – No infirmity in impugned order:KOLKATA CESTAT; 2009-TIOL-1700-CESTAT-BANG.pdf M/s Confident Dental Equipments Ltd Vs CCE, Bangalore (Dated: May 13, 2009) Central Excise – Free after sales service offered by dealers during warranty period not includible in transaction value:BANGALORE CESTAT;
CUSTOMS SECTION NOTIFICATION Customs exchange rate: Swedish Kroner rate amended; PUBLIC NOTICE DEPB rates for new engineering goods; CIRCULAR Procedure and guidelines for import of diamonds for certification and grading and re-export thereof - reg. Reimbursement of Secondary and higher education cess paid on excise duty/terminal excise duty in case of supplies made under deemed exports; CASE LAWS 2009-TIOL-1699-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + Global Exim story.pdf CC, Nhava Sheva Vs M/s Global Exim (Dated: September 9, 2009) Treating intra-departmental correspondence as appealable order – CESTAT deprecates this practice as illegal and un-judicial and sets aside order of Commissioner (Appeals).:MUMBAI CESTAT; M/s Sun Direct Tv Pvt Ltd Vs CC (Sea), Chennai (Dated: July 2, 2009) Customs – Valuation – Set top boxes supplied free of cost to the subscribers – as there is no transfer of the ownership, the same are not covered under Section 4A for valuation of CVD payable.:CHENNAI CESTAT; Annapurna Earcanal Pvt Ltd Vs CC, Chennai (Dated: August 5, 2009) Customs – Valuation – the payments of royalty and technical know-how fee are not includible in the declared price of the goods imported - the payment by the assessees cannot be said to be in relation to the imported goods but only in relation to the final products to be manufactured. :CHENNAI CESTAT; |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| Regards Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. |
