Legal Practice - persons practising profession of law whether in litigious matters or non litigious matters would be governed by Advocates Act - Permission given by RBI to foreign law firms under FERA is illegal: Bombay HC;

Macro economic variables confirm turnaround in economy: FM;

Constitutional Amendment for GST: FM to discuss issues with Law Minister soon;

ACC approves A Didar Singh's name as Secretary, Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs;

Law Ministry working on Equal Opportunity Commission Bill;

National e-Governance Plan: Govt to launch Passport Seva Project at 7 pilot locations - Ambala, Chandigarh, Ludhiana, Bangalore, Hubli and Mangalore;

CBI raids senior IAS officer posted in DDA; Search is on at 8 places in Delhi, Ghaziabad and Mathura;

Govt accepts Prasar Bharati Board Chairman's resignation;

Bombay High Court CJ Justice Swatanter Kumar appointed as SC Judge;

CBEC Chief Commissioners' posting order file again gets moving after brief halt at Revenue Secretary level;

Law Ministry working on Bill for appointment of judges: Law Minister

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 18 dec.pdf

Only Advocates entitled to practise profession of law in India - Bombay HC - What will happen to Consultants? ;

spl down.pdf

Any role for 'proper officer' under Central Excise (DPEG) Valuation Rules, 2000? ;

CASE LAW

2009-TIOL-709-HC-MUM-MISC.pdf + lawyer story.pdf

Lawyers Collective Vs Bar Council of India (Dated: December 16, 2009)

Legal Practice - persons practising the profession of law whether in litigious matters or non litigious matters would be governed by the Advocates Act – Only Advocates entitled to practise the profession of law in India – the RBI was not justified in granting permission to the foreign law firms to open liaison offices in India under Section 29 of the 1973 Act. the expressions ‘to practise the profession of law' in section 29 of the 1961 Act is wide enough to cover the persons practising in litigious matters as well as persons practising in non litigious matters and, therefore, to practise in non litigious matters in India, the respondent Nos. 12 to 14 were bound to follow the provisions contained in the 1961 Act.: BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz1133.pdf

Macro-economic variables confirm signs of turnaround in economy: FM;

mbuzz1132.pdf

Govt making visa, immigration procedures more friendly: HM;

mbuzz1131.pdf

Export value of Afghan opium declines: UNODC;

CASE LAWS

2009-TIOL-707-HC-KAR-IT.pdf

CIT, Bangalore Vs Synopsys India Pvt Ltd (Dated: December 2, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 195(2) and Sec 9 - Assessee is a registered company - purchases software from non-resident company - makes payment without tax deduction at source - Revenue treats the payment in the hand of recipient as royalty payment for licensing right to use under Sec 9 read with the DTAA - Tribunal holds it is a case of outright sale of software which is not liable to TDS - held, in view of the decision in the case of Samsung Electronics, assessee cannot decide the tax liability of the recipient and the payments made for software is liable to TDS u/s 195 - Revenue's appeal allowed.: KARNATAKA HIGH COURT;

2009-TIOL-784-ITAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Webex Communications India Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, Bangalore (India) Ltd (Dated: August 21, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 80IA(4)(ii) - Assessee is engaged in audio and video conferencing services - claims deduction - AO disallows - CIT(A) goes by the Tribunal's decision in earlier years and dismisses the appeal - held, the term 'undertaking' has been defined under the Income Tax Act. In order to constitute an undertaking, the unit must undertake the specified task. The undertaking as mentioned in 80IA(4)(ii) should be an undertaking which is providing telecommunication services in its own right and is consequently deriving the profit or gains there from. What the assessee company is doing is converting the visual images and audio voices into electro magnetic signals. It is then using the communication facility provided by BSNL to transmit such electro magnetic signals to the receiver. At the receiver end, the assessee company is having the system to convert such signals into video images and audio voices. The telecommunication services i.e. services through which the electro magnetic signals are to be communicated are not provided by the assessee company. The assessee company is using the network of BSNL either in the form of broadband or telephone lines for the communication. Hence, assessee is not eligible for such benefits - assessee's appeal dismissed.: BANGALORE ITAT;

2009-TIOL-783-ITAT-MAD.pdf

ACIT, Chennai Vs M/s W S Industries (India) Ltd (Dated: August 21, 2009)

Income Tax - Section 37(1) - Assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing electro porcelain products claims towards discharge of corporate guarantee obligation and advances not recoverable debited to share premium and claimed as business expenditure - AO allows the advance to be written off - However, as regards the loss on guarantee AO opins that loss on guarantee incurred by the assessee has nothing to do with business activity of the assessee and holds that the losses in question did not arise during the course of or incidental to his business - CIT(A) observes that if the assessee had given corporate guarantee for the purpose of business on grounds of commercial expediency, the amount paid for discharge of corporate guarantee would be allowable as deduction u/s 37(1) - Held, giving corporate guarantee was not only one of the objects of the assessee company but the same was given for its subsidiary company and it was in the interest of the assessee company and hence the commercially expedient decision. CIT(A) order upheld. Revenue Appeal dsmissed.: CHENNAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-782-ITAT-MUM.pdf

TATA SSL LTD Vs JCIT, Mumbai (Dated: November 9, 2009)

Income Tax - Section 36(1)(viii) - Assessee engaged in production of billets, wires, rods, and cold rolled strips and sheets - undertakes modernization of wire rod mill plant for improving product quality and enhancing installed capacity - existing plant closed for three months to facilitate quick installation of new machineries and construction works - assessee borrows interest-bearing funds for modernisation project - claims deductions - for cold rolled strip plant AO takes the view that since plant is yet to commence production, expenses to be considered as part of work in progress - disallows depreciation - also disallows interest paid on borrowed capital - CIT(A) goes with the AO - held, it is settled law that interest on borrowed capital is be allowed as deduction - Assessee's appeal partly allowed.: MUMBAI ITAT;

2009-TIOL-781-ITAT-DEL.pdf + it story.pdf

M/s Eldeco Infrastructure & Properties Ltd Vs DCIT, New Delhi (Dated: October 16, 2009)

Income by way of maintenance charges, club subscription, electricity charges, Misc. income, refund charges, transfer charges and interest on FDRs;by no stretch of imagination can be treated to have been derived from the business of developing and building housing projects. – not eligible for deduction under section 80- IB - On perusal of sub-section (5) of section 80- IA it is seen that it provides for the manner of computation of profits of an eligible business. As per provisions of 80- IA ( 5) of the Act the profits are to be computed as if such eligible business is the only source of income of the assessee. The assessee had earned income by way of maintenance charges, club subscription, electricity charges, Misc. income, refund charges, transfer charges and interest on FDRs . The income received under these heads by no stretch of imagination can be treated to have been derived from the business of developing and building housing projects approved by the local authority.

As regards interest on delayed payments from customers could be part of sale proceeds, but it is incidental to the developing and building the housing projects and is attributable to the business of the assessee. As regards the registration charges, this amount is also attributable to the business of the assessee. There may be cases where no registration charges are taken by the builders. There may a situation under which the intended buyer may leave the idea of purchasing of the house and registration charges collected from the person is not refunded to him. Hence registration charges will be attributable to the business of building and development of housing project and not derived from it. Therefore, the assessee will not eligible for deduction under section 80- IB of the Act in respect of these incomes.

Therefore, the assessee is not eligible for deduction under section 80- IB ( 10) of the Act in respect of these income.: DELHI ITAT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2009-TIOL-2076-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

CCE, Vadodara Vs M/s G Tech Construction Co (Dated: October 30, 2009)

ST - Erection, Commissioning or Installation Services - Assessee claims abatement of 67% under Notification No 19/2003-ST as amended - demand with interest confirmed - penalty under various Sections imposed - Commissioner(A) sets aside penalty - held, since the demand with interest is not challenged before the lower authority, the only issue is penalty, and merely because assessee takes a different view on the Notification, suppression cannot be alleged under Sec 78 - however, penalty u/s 77 for late filing of return is upheld.: AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2075-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

M/s Modern Travel Agency Vs CST, Ahmedabad (Dated: November 6, 2009)

ST - Rent-a-Cab Service - Revenue raises demand and imposes penalty as assessee fails to take registration - Assessee pleads financial hardship and seeks waiver of pre-deposit - held, since the assessee fails to make a strong case, pre-deposit of 25% of demanded sum ordered.: AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2009-TIOL-2078-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Chirakkal Weavers Co-Operative P & S Society Ltd. Vs CCE & CC, Calicut (Dated: June 23, 2009)

Central Excise – Unprocessed hand woven fabrics not eligible for benefit of exemption notification 7/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003 – Finding of Appellate Commissioner upheld – Exemption to goods cleared for export through export houses to be allowed by original authority based on statements/certificates produced by exporters – Appellant to discharge duty on goods not covered by export certificates – Matter remanded.: BANGALORE CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2077-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + DGP story.pdf

DGP Hinoday Industries Ltd Vs CCE (Appeals), Pune (Dated: October 27, 2009)

Duty and interest paid before issuance of Show Cause notice – if appellant pays penalty within thirty days of CESTAT order, then the amount payable would be only 25% of the duty amount.: MUMBAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2074-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Ransar Industries Ltd Vs CCE, Coimbatore (Dated: June 16, 2009)

Central Excise – Stay / Dispensation of pre-deposit – control panels cleared along with submersible pump sets – prima facie case for waiver of demand by classifying the control panels separately under Chapter Heading 85.37 of the tariff.: CHENNAI CESTAT;

2009-TIOL-2073-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Vasanth & Co Vs CCE, Trichy (Dated: July 3, 2009)

Central Excise – Procurement of goods without payment of duty for export under Rule 19(2) – There is no requirement under Rule 19(2) that the person who obtained the goods should himself export the goods – export through merchant exporter allowed.: CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2009-TIOL-2079-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + bajaj story.pdf

Rajendra Bajaj Vs CC (CSI Airport), Mumbai (Dated: October 8, 2009)

Gold chain with 12 diamonds worth Rs.1.20 Crores mounted on a gold pendant – whether personal effect – When the Delta Airlines flight from New York landed at the Mumbai International Airport at 22.04 hours, how could the panchanama be drawn at 22.00 hours at the Exit gate – CESTAT remands matter.: MUMBAI CESTAT;