ST - Recovery when Stay Application is Pending (See 'DDT' Column)

Export and import of currency - Now you can carry Rs. 7500 (See 'DDT' Column)

ITAT invites applications for 22 posts of Judicial Member;

Sufficient measures in place to protect Himalayan biodiversity;

CBDT invites applications for Joint Secretary (FT & TR-1) post ;

China steering global economy out of crisis: OECD;

CBI busts gang specialising in fake US money orders ;

CBI arrests Asst GM of SEBI accepting bribe of Rs 25 lakhs

India, New Zealand commence FTA talks; New Zealand hopeful of early breakthrough;

TIOL COMMENTARY

ddt 2 feb.pdf

Income Tax – No Business Profit in India in absence of permanent establishment;

guest column.pdf

A to Z: A Departmental Lexicon!

RBI NOTIFICATION

RBI Notifi for CRR.pdf

StCBs - Section 42(1) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 - Maintenance of CRR

MIXED BUZZ

mbuzz1279.pdf

Sufficient measures in place to protect Himalayan biodiversity;

mbuzz1278.pdf

China steering global economy out of slowdown: OECD;

mbuzz1277.pdf

CBI busts gang specialising in fake US money orders;

DEPUTATION POST

CBDT.pdf

Filling up the post of JS (FT&TR-I) in CBDT - regarding)

Application for invited JM and AM.pdf

ITAT invites applications for 22 posts of Judicial Member;

CASE LAWS

2010-TIOL-02-ARA-IT.pdf + ARA story.pdf

M/s Dassault Systems K K ( Dated : January 29, 2010)

Income Tax - India-Japan DTAT – Applicant is a Japanese company - engaged in supply of software products to the end-users - receives payments from third party re-sellers known as Value Added Resellers - whether payment received is royalty - whether income can be taxed as business profit in the absence of PE: ADVANCE RULING

2010-TIOL-52-ITAT-DEL.pdf + it story.pdf

Messee Dusseldorf India Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT, New Delhi (Dated: December 14, 2009)

Income tax - Assessee claims deduction for interest paid u/s 75 of Finance Act, 1994 on delayed payment of service tax - AO disallows on the ground that it is penal in nature - CIT(A) disagrees and holds that the interest payment is compensatory in nature and therefore a permissible business deduction - held,

++ interest payment u/s 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 has the same character as that of the service tax;

++ it is compensatory in nature and cannot be held to be penal in character; it is a permissible deduction.

Assessee also claims deduction for payment made for use of 'trade mark' / 'Logo' of a non-resident company in a trade fair - AO holds since the assessee got enduring benefits it is not revenue expenditure - held, since the logo was used only during the trade fair, no enduring benefits were reaped by the assessee - it is an allowable business expenditure :DELHI ITAT;

2010-TIOL-98-HC-HP-IT.pdf

Shri Virender Kumar Walia Vs ACIT (Dated: November 30, 2009)

Income tax - Sec 80IA - Assessee is a manufacturer, located in a remote area in a hilly state - for lack of rail network Govt provides transport subsidy - Assessee claims Sec 80IA benefits on the same - AO disallows - Tribunal goes with the AO - held, it is now settled law that for any profit or income to qualify for deduction u/s 80IA, it needs to be operation profits generated out of the business - since freight subsidy is not an operation profit, it is not eligible for deduction - Assessee's appeal dismissed :HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT;

2010-TIOL-97-HC-MUM-IT.pdf

Madhusudan Shrikrishna Vs M/s Emkay Exports (Dated: January 18, 2010)

Income tax - TDS u/s 194A - sum to be paid on Court decree - whether TDS to be deducted on interest component of the decree amount - held, no TDS to be deducted by defendants - once a decree is passed, it is an order of the court which has to be discharged only on payment of the amount due under the said decree. The debtor, therefore, cannot, deduct tax at source since it is an order and direction of the court and, as such, would not be liable for penal consequences for non-deduction of the tax due. Tax, if payable, can be decided by the Income-tax Officer after the amount is paid to the decree holder.:BOMBAY HIGH COURT;

2010-TIOL-96-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

CIT Vs Goetze India Ltd (Dated: January 20, 2010)

Income tax - Sec 147, 148 - AO reopens assessment after four years to disallow some prior period expenses - assessee contends that AO had made detailed inquiries and it had furnished information as well as answered queries of the AO - alleges mere change of opinion to reopen the case - Tribunal finds application of mind by the AO before allowing the same and lack of new materials indicating escapement of income - rules against the Revenue - on further appeal to the HC - held, no infirmity in the Tribunal's order as there has been no failure on part of the assessee to truly and fully disclose all the information sought by the Revenue - it is a case of mere change of opinion which is upheld by the SC decision in Kelvinator India case ( 2010-TIOL-06-SC-IT-LB ) - Revenue's appeal dismissed :DELHI HIGH COURT;

2010-TIOL-95-HC-DEL-IT.pdf

Ashok Arora Vs CIT, New Delhi (Dated: January 19, 2010)

Income tax - Sec 147, 148, 144 - Writ - Assessee agitates no notice was served - Revenue contends notice was received by somebody in office besides assessee was aware of the notice - held, going by the facts that the AO had disclosed reasons for initiating reassessment but assessee did not file any return and the AO was compelled to make the assessment u/s 144 - Assessee's writ petition dismissed :DELHI HIGH COURT;

SERVICE TAX SECTION

2010-TIOL-94-HC-MAD-ST.pdf + st hc story.pdf

M/s Creative Infospace Pvt Ltd Vs Additional Commissioner, Chennai (Dated: January 7, 2010)

Service Tax – Quantification of duty in the Show Cause Notice does not amount to predetermination of the issue – writ cannot be allowed: The quantification of the tax in the show cause notice is a statutory requirement and cannot be stated that the authority has predecided the issue. Therefore, the decision relied on by the counsel rendered by the Supreme Court in Siemens Ltd. Vs. State of Maharastra and others - has no application to the facts of the present case.:MADRAS HIGH COURT;

2010-TIOL-185-CESTAT-AHM.pdf

Pierlite India Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Ahmedabad (Dated: September 23, 2009)

ST - Cenvat Credit - Assessee avails credit of service tax paid by the job worker - Revenue issues SCN for recovery of credit availed on the ground that the same was taken after more than one year - held, given the fact that the assessee had intimated the Revenue about its intention to avail the credit, suppression cannot be alleged - then, it is decided by the Division Bench and also the CBEC manual that the credit cannot be denied to the assessee in such cases - assessee's appeal allowed : AHMEDABAD CESTAT;

CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION

2010-TIOL-189-CESTAT-MUM.pdf + kopran story.pdf

M/s Kopran Ltd Vs CCE, Raigad (Dated: December 15, 2009)

EPABX system installed in factory premises for communication from one department to another department can be held to be indirectly used in the manufacture of the final product – Cenvat Credit available - CESTAT:MUMBAI CESTAT;

2010-TIOL-188-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd Vs CCE, Mangalore (Dated: April 3, 2009)

Central Excise – Sulphur emerging as by product during the process of refining crude oil cleared as exempted product – Assessee not liable to pay 10% under Rule 6(3)(b) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 – Impugned order set aside :BANGALORE CESTAT;

2010-TIOL-187-CESTAT-BANG.pdf

M/s Resil Chemicals Pvt Ltd Vs CCE, Bangalore (Dated: October 13, 2009)

Central Excise - Re-warehousing certificate received beyond a period of 90 days - Mere technical breach does not provide for imposition of penalty under Rule 27 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - No mandate in Rule 27 that every breach should necessarily be penalized - Impugned order set aside :BANGALORE CESTAT;

2010-TIOL-186-CESTAT-MAD.pdf

M/s Sowbaghyalakshmi Silicate Vs CCE, Trichy (Dated: June 19, 2009)

Central Excise – interest on delayed refund of pre-deposit made under Section 35 F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – the appellant assessees are entitled for interest after three months from the date of remand order of the Tribunal – the claim of revenue that the interest is payable only after three months from the final disposal of the case is not sustainable – similarly the appellant-assessees' claim for interest from the date of remand order is also not sustainable. : CHENNAI CESTAT;

CUSTOMS SECTION

2010-TIOL-191-CESTAT-MAD.pdf + picasso story.pdf

M/s Picasso Overseas Vs CC, Chennai (Dated: September 7, 2009)

Customs – Anti-dumping duty during the interregnum period – In view of the Larger Bench decision in case of M/s Nitco tiles, no prima facie case made out for waiver of pre-deposit – entire duty demanded ordered to be pre-deposited. : CHENNAI CESTAT;

2010-TIOL-190-CESTAT-DEL.pdf

M/s Solaire Exports Pvt Ltd Vs CC, TKD, New Delhi (Dated: September 15, 2009)

Customs – Export of goods by merchant exporter by procurement from manufacturers and traders for claim of drawback and DEPB – Allegation of over-valuation for higher claim of drawback and DEPB – Drawback/DEPB for goods procured from manufacturers to be limited to invoice value of such goods – Drawback/DEPB for goods procured from traders to be reduced by 30% based on assessees past practise of reducing values to the extent of 20% to 30% when questioned by Customs authorities – Conduct of appellants in issuing parallel invoices and over-invoicing of exports justifies levy of penalties – Penalty imposed sustained – Authorities to rework drawback/DEPB claims – Excess drawback/DEPB recoverable with interest : DELHI CESTAT;