News Update

CBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silverFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerCentre receives Rs 18.5 lakh crore tax revenue upto Feb monthUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayExpert Committee on developing GIFT IFSC as 'Global Finance and Accounting Hub' submits report to IFSCAIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEADefence Production issues notification for re-organisation of DGQAThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCBDT substitutes Form in ITR-5EV Revolution: Lessons for India to learn from US and China!London court green-signals auction of luxury apartment of fugitive Nirav ModiGovt consults RBI; finalises borrowing plan for first half of FY 2024-25Gadkari says Farmers’ protest is politically-motivatedVP calls upon women entrepreneurs to be 'Vocal for Local'America offers USD 10 mn bounty for information on ‘Blackcat’ hackers after UnitedHealth gets hitI-T- The order of the ITSC can only be reopened in cases of fraud or misrepresentation: HC8 persons including Hezbollah militants killed in Israeli strike on LebanonMacron pillories EU-South Africa trade deal; calls it ‘really bad’ in BrazilThailand’s Lower House okays Bill to legitimise same-sex marriageYellen warns China against clean energy dumpingMilky Way’s central black hole - Twisted magnetic field observedCus - Assessee has not proved beyond reasonable doubt that goods in question imported under air way bills/bills of entry were in fact filed by him and hence the only natural corollary available to Revenue is confiscation of same: CESTATSmall investors help Trump Media’s valuation skyrocket to USD 13 billionJustice Ritu Raj Awasthi joins as Judicial member of Lokpal
 
Dead wood & something more removed from provisions of Settlement in Central Excise & Customs

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, FEB 28, 2015: MANY sections of Settlement in Central Excise Act & the Customs Act have seen amendments this Budget. These will come into effect only after enactment. Bulk of these amendments are because these provisons have become redundant .Not that they became redundant now but some have been lying dead and unattended since the past seven years!

On the CE side, some of these are –

+ proviso to sub-section (3) of section 32;

+ sub-section (1A) to section 32E;

+ sub-section (6) to section 32F;

+ section 32H

+ sub-section (1) to section 32K

+ clauses (i) and (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 32O

There are similar amendments in the Customs Act too.

Another amendment is in section 32B so as to enable even the Member to officiate as the Chairman in the absence of the Chairman of the Settlement Commission.

However, the amendment which catches attention pertains to section 31 of CEA, 1944 (s. 127A of Customs Act).

We refer to the provisions contained in the Central Excise Act, 1944 –

Section 31(c) reads –

(c) “case” means any proceeding under this Act or any other Act for the levy, assessment and collection of excise duty, pending before an adjudicating authority on the date on which an application under sub-section (1) of section 32E is made:

Provided that when any proceeding is referred back in any appeal or revision, as the case may be, by any court, Appellate Tribunal or any other authority, to the adjudicating authority for a fresh adjudication or decision, as the case may be, then such proceeding shall not be deemed to be a proceeding pending within the meaning of this clause;

By clause 93 of the Finance Bill, 2015, the words shown highlighted viz. “in any appeal or revision, as the case may be,” are being omitted.

The TRU-I letter mentions the following about this amendment - The proviso to sub-section (c) of section 31 relating to the provisions of Settlement Commission is being amended to delete the reference to “in appeal or revision, as the case may be” so as to provide that when any proceeding is referred back, whether in appeal or revision or otherwise, by any court, Appellate Tribunal Authority or any other authority to the adjudicating authority for a fresh adjudication or decision, then such case shall not be entitled for settlement.

Perhaps it would have been better had the reason for this omission been made clear.

One reason can be that usage of the words “appeal or revision” restricted the various occasions when the matter could be remanded by the Court/Tribunal.

Or should it be construed that as long as those words remain there, if the proceedings are remanded back in an appeal/revision filed by the assessee, ONLY then are they ineligible for bringing their “case” for settlement!


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023