TIOL-DDT 2719
05 11 2015
Thursday

ORGANISATIONS requiring the services of Customs Officers for performing various statutory duties are required to pay the costs of these officers. The Department used to create cost recovery posts, especially for this purpose. Issue of waiver from the payment of cost recovery charge in respect of ICDs/ CFSs, Seaports, Air Cargo Complexes, Courier Terminals, Diamond Plazas, etc. was under consideration of the Board for some time.

Now, the CBEC has decided that Chief Commissioner of Customs/Central Excise are authorized: -

(i) to exempt cost recovery charges for eligible facilities for posts that were not sanctioned. The exemption shall be for staff deployed. Excess staff, if any, deployed over and above the staffing norms, shall be withdrawn but without causing dislocation in work;

(ii) exemption from cost recovery charges for eligible facilities for which posts were sanctioned would be for the entire staff sanctioned (for which cost recovery charges were taken) even if it is in excess of the staffing norms fixed subsequently, in 2013; and

(iii) at eligible facilities having both sanctioned and non-sanctioned posts, the exemption of cost recovery charges for non- sanctioned posts would be dealt with as per decision at (i) above and for sanctioned posts, it would be as per decision at (ii) above.

It is only a one time measure. Regular requests for waiver of cost recovery charges would be processed by the Directorate General of Human Resource Development, CBEC.

DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE - F. No. 8/13/28/HRD(EMC)/CRB/2014 pt., Dated November 03 2015

NDPS - Evidence of Police officer as sole witness acceptable - Conviction upheld - SC

THERE is no legal proposition that evidence of police officials unless supported by independent evidence is unworthy of acceptance.

The Supreme Court yesterday delivered a landmark judgement in a Narcotics case.

It started 25 years ago in September 1990, when a police party seized 33 gunny bags containing poppy from a tractor with a trolley. In the trial court, the prosecution examined only one witness an Assistant Sub Inspector. The trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that only one prosecution witness was examined and his evidence was not trustworthy to base the conviction.

The High Court however reversed the acquittal and sentenced the accused to 12 years imprisonment. This was 2003. The convict appealed to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court decided the case yesterday.

The Supreme Court observed that there is no legal proposition that evidence of police officials unless supported by independent evidence is unworthy of acceptance. Evidence of police witnesses cannot be discarded merely on the ground that they belong to police force and interested in the investigation and their desire to see the success of the case. Prudence however requires that the evidence of police officials who are interested in the outcome of the result of the case needs to be carefully scrutinized and independently appreciated. Mere fact that they are police officials does not by itself give rise to any doubt about their creditworthiness.

Twenty five years after he was arrested, the Apex Court has convicted him to ten years imprisonment.

We bring you this judgement today. Please see Breaking News.

FTP - Application for Duty Credit Scrips of additional 2% under Market Linked Focus Product Scheme (MLFPS) - DGFT Clarifies

UNDER the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14, DGFT vide  Public Notice No. 53 dated 27.2.2014 allowed for grant of additional Duty Credit Scrips @ 2% to certain specified products under the Market Linked Focus Product Scheme (MLFPS) for exports made w.e.f. 1.3.2014 to 31.8.2014 if exported to the EU (27 countries). This 2% duty credit scrip was in addition to the benefits of 2% under Focus Product Scheme (FPS).

It has come into the notice of DGFT through various representations that few exporters have already filed their application for FPS and received their claim. But they are eligible for additional benefits as per the Public Notice and are unable to file their applications online as their shipping bills have already been utilised to claim benefit under FPS and the system does not allow the claim of additional benefit on the utilised shipping bills

DGFT instructs that the exporters may file a letter with the RA to claim additional benefit intimating the details of earlier application No. (E-Com Reference no.) file no. etc. along with shipping bill number, date of shipping bill, description etc. and coverage indicating serial no. of the Public Notice. RA may verify the claim and thereafter issue supplementary scrip.

DGFT Trade Notice No. 08/2015., Dated: November 03, 2015

CBEC on Facebook and Twitter - Wants officers to send bytes

THE use of Social Media to engage with the stakeholders was discussed by the CBEC in the meeting held on 16th October, 2015.

The Board took note of the fact that a number of government ministries/organisations are making use of Social Media, inter alia, to disseminate information, generate awareness, education etc. The Board, accordingly, approved the use of Social Media for the said purpose.

The Board was informed that timely input/information are not received by the DGTS, which does not allow regular and timely updating of CBEC's account on Facebook and Twitter handle.

The Board has therefore, directed that all wings & field formations of CBEC should regularly send "inputs or bytes" to DGTS. This would fulfil the objective of a rich and rewarding user experience for visitors to our social media accounts.

CBEC F. No. 296/282/2015-CX.9., Dated November 04 2015

Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT Notified

THE President of CESTAT has notified the creation of the Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT.

The jurisdiction of the Regional Bench will be Appeals arising from territories within the territorial jurisdiction of Union Territory of Chandigarh, the States of Punjab & Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh.

The Regional Bench, Chandigarh shall start functioning by accepting filing of appeals w.e.f. 01.12.2015 at the following address:

Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Ist-3" Floor, SCO No. 147-148, Sector-17C, Chandigarh- 160017.

CESTAT Notification No. 02/2015., Dated November 04 2015

Over a Crore of rupees already spent on Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT

THE CESTAT in an RTI reply yesterday informed that an amount of Rs. 1,01,36,884 has been spent so far on the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal. The amount spent on the Hyderabad Bench which is yet to be notified was Rs. 87,16,700 on civil and electric works. The Nation got the Allahabad Bench almost free as the total expenditure so far had been only Rs. 55,014 and that too was paid to Packers and Movers.

Until Tomorrow with more DDT

Have a nice day.

Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in