R C Misra, IAS (OR:76) is new Secretary of Administrative Reforms;

CBEC Full Board discusses and finalises Chief Commissioners' posting order; File all set to move up today;

Govt levies anti-dumping duty on Synchronous Digital Hierarchy Transmission Equipment;

Leviability of duty on capital goods cleared after being put into use for over 10 years-reg;

CVC asks for rotational transfer of officers holding sensitive posts;

Manufacturing to play key role in ensuring equitable economic growth: India;

Global investment dismal in 2009: OECD;

House Panel seeks feedback on exports sops and performance of cement industry;

CSIR attains first ever Human Genome Sequencing in India;

TIOL RUN UP TO GST

gst story.pdf

Aam Admi under GST - Will prices indeed fall?

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 9 dec.pdf

Reversal of CENVAT Credit on WIP/ finished goods written off in books of accounts - Board Clarifies;

stgst.pdf

A non-GST matter worth debating!

CASE LAW + ANALYSIS

2009-TIOL-670-HC-DEL-MISC.pdf + reebok story.pdf

Reebok India Company Vs UoI (Dated: August 31, 2009)

Standards of Weights and Measures Act and Rules – No specific notification required for a class of goods; Various sub-clauses of Section 1(3) of the SWM Act empowers the Central Government to issue separate notifications and appoint different dates for enforcement of (a) different sections/sub sections of the SWM Act (b) areas to which the SWM Act will be applicable, (c) classes of goods to which the SWM Act will be applicable and (d) classes of weights and treasures or users of weights and measures to which the SWM Act will be applicable. However, Section 1(3) does not endure a notification for individual or specific goods. A general notification is not barred or prohibited.

"Commodity in packaged form" means any commodity which is packed; the definition elucidates that the packaging can be in any form i.e. in a bottle, tin container, wrapper or otherwise. All forms and types of packaging are covered. The intention of the legislature is to expand the scope and cover any and every type of packaging. The intention is not to restrict the definition of the term "commodity in packaged form" to specific type of packing. Use of the word "otherwise" in the end, expands and widens the scope and does not restrict the definition to a particular type of packaging. Reason and cause why packing is done or whether packing is essential and required for sale is irrelevant. No link between the commodity or unit by reference to packing is required.

Even a single or an individual item amounts to sale by measure or by count; Measure or count does not require more than one item. A single item or single commodity when packed will be coved by Section 39 as the said commodity will be sold by count or measure. It is not necessary that the count should be more than one and not one. There is no such requirement in Section 39. Once Section 39 of the SWM Act applies then the provisions and stipulations therein have to be complied with. Section 39(1) of the SWM Act prohibits manufacturing, packaging or selling of any commodity in packed form unless the package bears the label to identify the commodity in it, net quantity in terms of standards of weights and measures in the packaged commodity, adequate numbers of commodities in the package, unit sale price and the like .

The provisions of SWM Act and the SWM Rules have been enacted for the benefit of and to safeguard interest of the consumers: They have a salutary objective and purpose behind them. The SWM Act and the SWM Rules have to be interpreted in a manner that the object behind the provisions is not frustrated and rendered superfluous but promoted and protected.:DELHI HIGH COURT;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz1102.pdf

CVC asks for rotational transfer of officers holding sensitive posts;

mbuzz1101.pdf

Manufacturing to play key role in ensuring equitable economic growth: India;

mbuzz1100.pdf

Global investment dismal in 2009: OECD;

mbuzz1099.pdf

House Panel seeks feedback on exports sops and performance of cement industry;

2009-TIOL-668-HC-HP-IT.pdf

CIT Vs M/s H P State Cooperative Bank Ltd (Dated: November 3, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 80P(2)(a)(i) - Assessee is a registered Cooperative Society, carrying on banking business - earns interest income from investment of non-SLR reserves - AO disallows - Tribunal allows the appeal - held, the expression used in the Section is 'attributable to' which has much wider import than the expression 'derived' from. The expression 'attributable to' is used in conjunction with the phrase 'any one or more of such activities'. Any banking business providing credit facilities to its members and investing the sums deposited by the members of the society is part of banking business. The investment of the funds by the banks, including the non reserves were part of the banking activities since no bank would like its reserve funds to remain idle and not earn any interest. This is not only prudent business management but is also a part of the activity of banking. Therefore, the interest earned on such deposits is directly attributable to the business of banking. Revenue's appeal dismissed.: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-667-HC-HP-IT.pdf

CIT Vs M/s Ambuja Darla Kashlog Mangu Transport Co Op Society (Dated: October 20, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 194C(2) - Assessees are registered socieites / Association of persons constituted by Truck Operators - enter into contract with Cement manufacturers for transport of goods - companies which enter into contract with the societies deduct TDS u/s 194C(1) - On receiving payment the assessee-societies make payments to its members who carry the goods - out of such payments, societies keep a nominal sum as administrative charges - AO for TDS on payments made to members by the societies - CIT(A) and Tribunal disagree with the AO - held, it is true that the Society has an independent legal status and is also contractor within the meaning of Section 194C. It is also not disputed that the members have a separate status but there is no sub-contract between the society and the members. In fact if the entire working of the society is seen it is apparent that the societies have entered into a contract on behalf of the members. The society is nothing but a collective name for all the members and the contract entered by the society is for the benefit of the constituent members and there is no contract between the society and the members. No TDS u/s 194C(2) is to be deducted. Revenue's appeal dismissed: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-666-HC-HP-IT.pdf

CIT Vs M/s Allied Industries (Dated: October 21, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 80IB - Assessee manufactures tractor and auto parts - claims deduction u/s 80IB - AO raises question about lower profits of the sister concern being run by one of the partners of the assessee-company - reply filed but the assessee also offered additional income for levying tax - also claimed deduction u/s 80IB - AO disallows but Tribunal allows it - held, if the additional sum is the income from business, deduction is eligible from the total sum. But if it is from any other source, deduction may not be allowed but Revenue fails to produce any evidence to prove that it is not business income - Revenue's appeal dismissed: HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-760-ITAT-MUM.pdf + ssi story.pdf

DCIT, Mumbai Vs M/s Bombay Diamond Co Ltd (Dated: November 30, 2009)

Income tax - Assessing Officer cannot go beyond the book profits as per the audited accounts provided they are prepared as per the manner provided in Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies act, 1956 and are adopted in the AGM: However, in the instant case, admittedly the accounts are not prepared in the manner provided in Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956 since the profit on sale of investments amounting to Rs.10,38,13,765/- which is a material amount, has not been routed through the Profit and Loss A/c. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has the power to re-work the book profit by recasting the accounts in the manner provided as per Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956. : MUMBAI ITAT;

DCIT, Mumbai Vs M/s Rolls Royce Marine India Pvt Ltd (Dated: November 3, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 40(a)(iii) - Assessee pays salary to its Managing Director outside India - AO disallows it - Assessee argues the issue is already decided in its favour in the earlier AYs - held, since the issue is already settled in favour of the assessee, Revenue's appeal dismissed:MUMBAI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-2017-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Quintiles Technologies (India) Pvt Ltd Vs CST, Ahmedabad (Dated: November 6, 2009)

ST - Recipient of service - assessees are subsidiaries of US-based MNC - Revenue for levy of service tax on receipt of management consultancy service from parent company - held, it is settled law that there is no service tax liability on such services received prior to 18.4.2006 - Assessees' appeals allowed :AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2016-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE, Rajkot Vs M/s Bhavani Enterprises (Dated: October 23, 2009)

ST - Manpower Recruitment Service - Delay in payment of tax - Demand raised and penalties levied - Commissioner (A) reduces penalties - held, since the Commissioner(A) has found that the assessee is new to service tax regulations and have also paid tax with interest and part penalty, a lenient view is called for - Commissioner(A)'s order upheld - Revenue's appeal rejected :AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2015-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Pricewater House Coopers Pvt Ltd Vs CST, Chennai (Dated: July 28, 2009)

Service Tax – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit – demand of service tax on indirect tax compliance services / representation service under the category of Management Consultancy Service during the period from October 2002 to March 2006– prima facie case has been made out for waiver of pre-deposit.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

INSTRUCTION

excise_instructions_leviability_duty.pdf

Leviability of duty on capital goods cleared after being put into use for over 10 years-reg

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-669-HC-MUM-CX.pdf + ssi story.pdf

CCE, Pune Vs Ravi Batteries (Dated: June 30, 2009 )

Central Excise – SSI exemption – clubbing - Merely because both the firms were dealing in the same type of production and because one of the partners in both the firms was same, it could not be concluded that one was a dummy unit of the other: In view of these reasons, the Tribunal rejected the contention of the Revenue and allowed the appeals by majority of two against one. The findings of the Tribunal are clearly based on facts. In view of some of the salient facts noted above, it is impossible to hold that the findings of fact given by two of the Members are perverse. :BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-2014-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

CCE, Hyderabad Vs M/s Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages (P) Ltd (Dated: June 29, 2009)

Central Excise – Treated water cleared to vending machines through canisters/stainless steel tanks for producing aerated beverages not liable to excise duty – Process of purification/filtration merely improved quality of water – Note 2 to Chapter 22 of CETA 1985 not applicable in the absence of market enquiry and proof of sale of treated water to individual consumers – No infirmity in impugned order of Appellate Commissioner :BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2013-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s SJLT Textiles (P) Ltd Vs CCE, Salem (Dated: August 17, 2009)

Central Excise – Stay/Dispensation of pre-deposit - removal of capital goods as such - the applicants are required to pay an amount equal to the credit availed – but not 16% on the transaction value – Pre deposit ordered – Rule 3 (5) of CCR, 2004.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2012-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Tafe Limited Vs CCE, Madurai (Dated: August 7, 2009)

Central Excise – CENVAT Credit balance outstanding as on the date of 1800 CC tractors becoming exempt – the appellants are eligible to utilize the outstanding credit in view of the Larger Bench decision in case of M/s HMT Ltd & Others – credit is also admissible on the supplementary invoices received after the exemption in respect of the inputs received prior to the exemption.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

NOTIFICATION

ctariff09_132.pdf

Govt levies anti-dumping duty on Synchronous Digital Hierarchy Transmission Equipment;

dgft09pn024.pdf

DGFT - Appendix 37D, HoP Vol. I, in TABLE 1 (FOCUS PRODUCTS), under the heading HANDLOOM PRODUCTS, at Sl. No. 28, ITC (HS) Code 52091113 is added after the ITC (HS) Code 52091112 and ITC (HS) Code 52091119 is deleted.;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-2011-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

CC, Chennai Vs M/s Erbis Engineering Co Ltd (Dated: August 17, 2009)

Customs – Exemption under Notification No 17/2001 Cus dated 1.3.2001 is admissible to the parts of the Image Intensifier – exemption not confined only to the Image Intensifier System.:CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2010-CESTAT-MUM.pdf

Cooper Pharma Vs CC, Nhava Sheva (Dated: July 31, 2009)

Duty was paid on assessment of bill of entry but the order permitting clearance of the goods for home consumption was not given under Section 47 of the Customs Act – Appellant has right to relinquish title of goods under Section 23 of Customs Act - Impugned order set aside and appeal allowed with consequential relief.

Rejection of claim for refund of import duty paid on abandoned goods on ground of finality of assessment order by relying on CCE, Kanpur Vs Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. [ 2002-TIOL-208-SC-CX ] – Appellant relies on provisions of Section 23 of Customs Act which provides the owner of goods the option to relinquish the title of goods before issuance of order for clearance of goods for home consumption Section 47. :MUMBAI CESTAT;