If you know how to use the Cell Phone, filing the IT Return is not difficult - Revenue Secretary
20.11.2014
Thursday
OUR roving Edit Team caught up with Revenue Secretary Shaktikanta Das at the India International Trade Fair in New Delhi yesterday.
He said that filing of an Income Tax return is not difficult as today even not very educated persons are able to use Cell Phone and Whatsapp.
It's all in the mindset - (of the assessees)
You can see excerpts from what he told our team in the video below.
Six Months Time for taking CENVAT Credit - Not Applicable for Re-credit - CBEC Clarifies
THE CENVAT Credit Rules were amended by Notification No. 21/2014-CENT dated 11.7.2014 with effect from 01.09.2014, inter alia to bar CENVAT Credit after six months from the date of the document specified in sub-rule (1) of Rule 9.
Does the time limit of six months apply for re-credit in the following situations?
(i) 3rd proviso to Rule 4(7) of CCR, 2004 prescribes that if the payment of value of input service and service tax payable is not made within three months of date of invoice, bill or challan, then the CENVAT Credit availed is required to be paid back by the manufacturer or service provider. Subsequently, when such payment of value of input service and service tax is made, the amount so paid back can be re-credited.
(ii) According to Rule 3(5B) of CCR, 2004, if the value of any input or capital goods before being put to use on which CENVAT Credit has been taken, is written off or such provisions made in Books of Account, the manufacturer or service provider is required to pay an amount equal to credit so taken. However, when the inputs or capital goods are subsequently used, the amount so paid can be re-credited in the account.
(iii) Rule 4(5)(a) of CCR, 2004 prescribes that in case inputs sent to job worker are not received back within 180 days, the manufacturer or service provider is required to pay an amount equal to credit taken on such inputs in the first instance. However, when the inputs are subsequently received back from job worker, the amount so paid can be re-credited in the account.
Board explains : The purpose of the amendment made by Notification No. 21/2014-CE (NT) dated 11.07.2014 is to ensure that after the issue of a document under sub-rule (1) of Rule 9, credit is taken for the first time within six months of the issue of the document. Once this condition is met, the limitation has no further application .
Board Clarifies : In each of the three situations described above pertaining to Rule 4(7), Rule 3(5B) or Rule 4(5) (a) of CCR, 2004, the limitation of six months would apply when the credit is taken for the first time on an eligible document. It would not apply for taking re-credit of amount reversed, after meeting the conditions prescribed in these rules.
While we should be grateful to the Board for the benign clarification, let us hope the Board would also clarify the position in the following situations:
1. Taking of credit under Rule 16(1) of the Central Excise Rules on duty paid goods brought to a factory for being remade, refined etc.
2. Taking of credit by SSI units on the inputs lying in stock, when they cross the exemption limit and enter the duty-paying arena.
Also see - 2014-TIOL-2102-CESTAT-MUM, DDT-2462 & Credit vs. Re-credit
CBEC Circular No.990/14/2014-CX-8., Dated: November 19, 2014
FTP - Import Policy of Scheduled Chemicals
GOVERNMENT has stipulated the following condition for import of scheduled chemicals:
"Import of chemicals listed at Category 1A, 1B&1C of Appendix 3 (SCOMET list) to Schedule 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items is subject to the condition that for each import consignment, the importer shall, within 30 days of imports, notify the details of import to Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), National Authority, Chemical Weapons Convention (NACWC) and Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals".
It is now mandatory for the importers of chemicals listed at Category 1A, 1B&1C of Appendix 3 (SCOMET list) to Schedule 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items to notify the details of such imports to DGFT, NACWC and Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals within 30 days from the date of their importation.
DGFT Notification No. 98 (RE - 2013)/2009-2014., Dated: November 19, 2014
FTP - India's Import/export regulation for items under Crime Control (CC) & Regional Security (RS) of USA
DGFT has stipulated the following regulations for India's import and export with regard to USA's unilateral export control items [Crime Control (CC) Items as listed in Appendix 31(iia) and Regional Security (RS) items as listed in Appendix 31(iib)] :
Items listed at both Appendix 31(iia) and Appendix 31(iib) will be allowed by DGFT for import from USA provided the importer submits the following documents in Appendix 31:
1. documentary proof of Bill of Lading indicating Port of USA,
2. legal undertaking that goods shall not be exported/ alienated; and
3. Import is with Actual User condition.
In case the importer wants to subsequently export the imported items, or any part thereof, from USA, such export will require an authorization from DGFT.
Import /export of such items shall be allowed only through EDI enabled ports of India.
DGFT Public Notice No. 74 (RE - 2013)/2009-2014., Dated: November 19, 2014
RBI advises to pay Income Tax well in advance
THE Reserve Bank of India has appealed to income tax assessees to remit their income tax dues sufficiently in advance of the due date. It has also stated that assessees can use alternate channels like select branches of agency banks or the facility of online payment of taxes offered by these banks. These will obviate the inconvenience involved in standing in long queues at the Reserve Bank offices. (Do they still stand in queue at RBI to pay Income Tax?)
It is observed that the rush for remitting Income -Tax dues through the Reserve Bank of India has been far too heavy towards the end of December every year and it becomes difficult for the Reserve Bank to cope with the pressure of issuing receipts although additional counters to the maximum extent possible are provided for the purpose.
Twenty-nine agency banks are authorised to accept payments of Income Tax dues.
RBI Press Release, Dated: November 19, 2014
When Appeal Dismissed due to low tax effect, no ruling on the Issue - High Court
BY Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09.02.2011, the CBDT directed that appeals by the Department to the High Court should not be made if the tax effect is less than Rs. 10 lakhs.
In a case decided last week by the Bombay High Court, the Commissioner of Income Tax filed three appeals before the High Court, in all of which the tax effect was less than Rs. 10 lakhs.
His apprehension expressed before the High Court was that in the event the Appeal is dismissed only on this count and relying on the Circular, it would be construed that the discussion and reasoning of the Tribunal has met with this Court's approval. It would also mean that the order of the Tribunal has been upheld by this Court .
Was the Revenue misleading the High Court?
Para 6 of the Board Instruction reads as:
In a case where appeal before a Tribunal or a Court is not filed only on account of the tax effect being less than the monetary limit specified above, the Commissioner of Income-tax shall specifically record that “even though the decision is not acceptable, appeal is not being filed only on the consideration that the tax effect is less than the monetary limit specified in this instruction”, Further, in such cases, there will be no presumption that the Income-tax Department has acquiesced in the decision on the disputed issues. The Income-tax Department shall not be precluded from filing an appeal against the disputed issues in the case of the same assessee for any other assessment year, or in the case of any other assessment year, if the tax effect exceeds the specified monetary limits .
Didn't the Commissioner read the Board Instruction or was he showing his contempt for Board instructions? When the Board Instruction is very clear, why should the Commissioner entertain that apprehension? Why should he file the appeal in the first place (against Board Instruction) and then have the apprehension?
Please see 2014-TIOL-2007-HC-MUM-IT
Commercial Employment by Retired Babus - Form for Permission Revised
RETIRED Government servants proposing to take up commercial employment within a year of retirement are required to seek permission from the Government. They are required to apply for permission in Form 25 of CCS(Pension) Rules. Form 25 prescribed has since been reviewed with a view to simplify the procedure.
DoPT Office Memorandum No.27012/3/2014-Estt(A)., Dated: November 19, 2014
Jurisprudentiol-Friday's cases
Service Tax
NASSCOM is not liable to pay service tax under the category of Club & Association service in respect of subscription amount charged from its members: CESTAT
THE appellant NASSCOM is an apex body with various software companies as its Members who together contribute subscription amount for achievement of various objectives of public, industry and national importance including awareness/education/exports/ intellectual capital growth/governance/standard/technology.
Revenue took a view that the subscription amount charged by the appellant from its Members would attract service tax under the category 'Club and Association Service'.
Income Tax
Whether when assessee receives refundable advance as per MoU for joint development of land, such sum is capital receipt, not taxable in hand of assessee - YES: ITAT
THE assessee is a partnership firm and is carrying on the business as builder and developer. It carries on its business activities in Mumbai and Jaipur. The partners are D and P. The revenue carried out search and seizure operations in the hands of GHP Group of cases. A survey operation was also conducted at the business premises of the assessee at Jaipur and certain documents were impounded and statements were taken during the course of search/survey operations.
The issue before the Bench is - Whether when assessee receives refundable advance as per MoU for joint development of land, such sum is capital receipt, not taxable in hand of assessee. YES is the answer.
Customs
Recovery of incineration charges for destruction of goods as per SC order - there is no provision for grant of stay under rule 41 of CESTAT Rules or for that matter under the Customs Act in respect of incineration charges - Tribunal has no jurisdiction whatsoever: CESTAT
A notice dated 21/07/2014 was issued by the Dy. Commissioner of Customs, JNCH, NhavaSheva, pertaining to recovery of incineration charges of the waste oil contained in 39 containers of quantity 6,28,368 kg. The incineration charges for destruction of these goods amounting Rs.92,11,047/- @ Rs.14.80 per kg., is sought to be recovered as per Apex Court's order dated 04/04/2014.
This Tribunal granted stay in respect of dues adjudged namely, duty, interest and penalty. There is no provision for grant of stay under Rule 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. In the present case, the issue relates to recovery of incineration charges and there is no provision under the Custom Act to stay recovery of such charges. Further, the recovery is sought to be made in terms of the Apex Court order.
See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements
Until Tomorrow with more DDT
Have a nice day.
Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in
