News Update

Railways operates record number of additional Trains in Summer Season 2024GST - Assessing officer took into account the evidence placed on record and drew conclusions - Bench is, therefore, of the view that petitioner should present a statutory appeal: HC1st phase polling - Close to 60% voter turnout recordedGST - Tax liability was imposed because petitioner replied without annexing documents - It is just and appropriate that an opportunity be provided to contest tax demand on merits, albeit by putting petitioner on terms: HCMinistry of Law to organise Conference on Criminal Justice System tomorrowGST - To effectively contest the demand and provide an opportunity to petitioner to place all relevant documents, matter remanded but by protecting revenue interest: HCGovt appoints New Directors for 6 IITsGST - Petitioner has failed to avail opportunities granted repeatedly - Court cannot entertain request for remand as there has been no procedural impropriety and infraction of any provision by assessing authority: HCNexus between Election Manifesto and Budget 2024 in July!GST - Classification - Matter which had stood examined by Principal Commissioner is being treated differently by Additional Commissioner - Prima facie , approach appears to be perverse: HCI-T- Denial of deduction u/s 80IC can create perception of genuine hardship, where claimant paid tax in excess of what was due; order denying deduction merits re-consideration: HCIsrael launches missile attack on IranEC holds Video-Conference with over 250 Observers of Phase 2 pollsGermany disfavours Brazil’s proposal to tax super-richI-T- If material found during search are not incriminating in nature AO can not made any addition u/s 153A in respect of unabated assessment: ITATGovt appoints Dinesh Tripathi as New Navy ChiefAFMS, IIT Kanpur to develop tech to address health problems of soldiersFBI sirens against Chinese hackers eyeing US infrastructureKenya’s top military commanders perish in copter crashCBIC notifies Customs exchange rates w.e.f. April 19, 2024Meta shares ‘Most Intelligent’ AI assistant built on Llama modelDengue cases soaring in US - Close to ‘Emergency situation’: UN Agency
 
Single Registration for Importer & Trader - CBEC Invites Suggestions on Draft

DDT in Limca Book of Records - Third Time in a rowTIOL-DDT 2852
24 05 2016
Tuesday

BY Notification No. 8/2014-CENT and 9/2014-CENT both dated 28.2.2014, the CE Rules and CENVAT Credit Rules were amended to stipulate that an importer who issues an invoice on which CENVAT Credit can be taken, is required to get registered and file a quarterly return.

Representations have been received from the trade stating that in the case of assessees who are both "importers" and "dealers" the need for taking separate registration and filing separate returns has increased procedural compliance and transaction cost. For improving ease of doing business they have requested for a single registration and return for such assessees .

In DDT 2385 30 06 2014, we covered this issue as:

Now if an importer deals with indigenous goods also, should he get registered as a dealer and separately as an importer? Should he get a new registration as an importer even if he is already registered as a dealer? The Mumbai Chief Commissioner of Central Excise says, YES .

Many assessees feel that these are more of directions than clarifications and complicate the issue further. They feel that this could not have been the intention of the Board and the Government. Why should you tie up the assessee with more and more procedural wrangles? They expect the Board to clarify.

Board is trying to solve the problem after nearly two years.

Board has examined the issue and is considering optional facility to an assessee who conducts business both as an importer and a first stage dealer, to take only one registration. Secondly, such assessees who conduct business both as a first stage dealer and an importer shall also have the option of filing a single quarterly return giving details of transactions as a first stage dealer and an importer one after the other in the same table of the return.

Board has released a draft Notification and Circular proposed to be issued. Board wants feedback from the departmental officers and the Members of the Trade by 6th June, 2016 on the email id: shankar.sarma@nic.in

Please also see Are two registrations required under CE Law for a dealer?

CBEC F.No 201/042016-CX.6., Dated: May 23, 2016

Issue/Modification in Importer Exporter Code - DGFT Clarifies

AS Para 2.14(b) of HBP (2015-20), "An application for modification may be made for change in details like name, address, constitution, ownership in Proprietorship firms, change in nature of the firm e.g. from proprietorship to partnership etc. Change in constitution however, does not include change in Directors of Public Limited Company."

It seems there is some problem in modification of IEC in cases where there is a change in the PAN. It is highlighted that with the change in the constitution of the firm/change in the nature of the firm such as from Partnership to Limited Liability Partnership etc., there is a change in the PAN number and the new PAN number needs to be incorporated in the existing IEC, replacing the PAN already registered against the current IEC.

Since each IEC is tagged to a particular PAN in the system, modification in PAN was not being entertained by the Regional Authorities - the prime consideration being how to transfer and seamlessly carry forward the liabilities of one firm, which merges into another or changes its nature and name.

To resolve the issue, matter was taken up with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and they are of the view that:

1. conversion of a firm or an LLP into a company or

2. merger of a company into another company or

3. merger of two or more companies to form a new company or

4. demerger of a company to form a new company

does not extinguish the liability if any, of the Transferor Entity/Company and the liability of such Transferor Entity/Company would automatically vest in the Transferee Entity/Company, by operation of Law.

So, DGFT directs:

1. the RAs shall henceforth consider applications seeking modification in IEC, involving change in PAN, by ensuring that liabilities of the previous applicant/applicant firm are transferred to the new applicant/applicant firm whose PAN will be reflecting in the modified IEC.

2. RAs must also share the modified IEC, with the changed PAN incorporated in it, with all concerned authorities. (who is concerned?)

Power of Attorney Holder can sign: It is noticed that RAs have been rejecting applications digitally signed by Power of Attorney (instead of a Director) on the ground that power of attorney is not explicitly mentioned in the application format issued vide PN No. 58 dated 01.02.2016. DGFT clarifies that applications digitally signed by power of attorney holders/authorised signatories are to be entertained.

DGFT Trade Notice No. 6/2016., Dated: May 23, 2016

Income Tax -TDS - Relaxation for Furnishing of UID

THE provisions of section 197A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 inter alia provide that tax shall not be deducted, if the recipient of certain payment on which tax is deductible furnishes to the payer a self-declaration in Form No.15G/15H in accordance with provisions of the said section. The manner of filing such declarations and the particulars have been laid down in Rule 29C of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.

The amended Rule 29C which came into effect from 1st October, 2015 in addition to paper filing, also provides for online filing of self-declaration for non-deduction of tax under section 197A of the Act.

Sub-rule (3) of Rule 29C provides for allotment of Unique identification number to each declaration received in Form 15G/15H by the deductor. Further, sub-rule (5) of Rule 29C provides that the payer shall also furnish unique identification number along with the details of the transactions covered under Form 15G/15H in quarterly TDS statements in accordance with the provisions of clause (vii) of sub-rule (4) of Rule 31A irrespective of the fact that no tax has been deducted in the said quarter.

Representations have been received that due to operational constraints, the Form 15G/15H and the details thereof could not be included in the quarterly statement for the quarter ending 31.12.2015 and 31.3.2016 respectively.

Taking into account the concerns of the stakeholders, the Central Board of Direct Taxes, has relaxed the condition of furnishing of Unique identification number allotted by the deductor for the quarter ending 31.12.2015 and 31.3.2016 in the quarterly statement of deduction of tax in accordance with sub-rule (5) of Rule 29C.

CBDT Circular No. 18/2016., Dated: May 23, 2016

Income Tax - email based communication for Paperless Assessment Proceedings-Hyderabad and Kolkata Added

PAPERLESS assessment/e-assessment has been conceived to usher in a paperless environment while carrying out regular assessments of cases selected by the Department. In this regard, to start with, the CBDT had, during the last Financial Year, decided to implement the e-mail based assessments on a pilot basis in non-corporate charges of 5 cities i.e. Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi and Mumbai where the e-mail based assessment proceedings were initiated and disposal of several cases has been reported.

It has now been decided to cover two more cities, Hyderabad and Kolkata, for implementing e-mail based communication scheme for paperless assessment proceedings.

It is now open for all the taxpayers assessed in those seven cities, whose cases have been selected under scrutiny, to opt for being scrutinized under the e-mail based paperless assessment proceedings by giving their consent.

However, the cases, which require submission of voluminous documents and it is not practicable to submit the scanned copies through e-mail, the documents could be received by the assessing officer in physical form provided reasons are recorded for the same. It is also necessary that proper Note-sheet is maintained for recording the entire proceedings.

The Directorate of Systems is in the process of developing a dedicated module for comprehensive e-scrutiny. Till the same gets functional, the Assessing Officers may be advised to follow Notification No.2/2016 dated 3rd Feb 2016 issued by Pr. DGIT(Systems) prescribing the procedure, formats and standards for ensuring secured transmission of electronic communication. Further, the instructions issued by the Member (IT) vide his D.O dated 9th May 2016 may also be strictly complied with.

In order to make the Scheme a success, Board requests the Principal Chief Commissioners to give due publicity in media and create awareness and a sense of confidence so that the taxpayers of these seven cities, whose cases have been selected under scrutiny, give their consent for being covered under the e-mail based paperless assessment proceedings.

CBDT Letter in F.No.225/267/2015/ITA.II., Dated: May 23, 2016

Customs - Timely cancellation of bond executed with Customs in Advance Authorization Cases - reg

THE Commissioner of Customs (NS-IV), JN Custom House, Mumbai issued a Public Notice yesterday highlighting that in the matter of time taken in cancellation of bonds executed by exporters in respect of advance authorizations, the following guidelines have been issued.

a) Regarding verifications of address shown on authorisation/availability of inputs imported duty free, the percentage of random checks have been reduced from “at least 5%” cases to “5% cases”. These checks are to be initiated periodically every month and the checks/ verification will be completed during the validity of authorization.

b) Non-receipt of confirmation from Central Excise will not cause delay in processing a subsequent application for cancellation of bond.

c) The exporters are requested to identify those cases, where export obligation period is getting over and keep their documents ready for processing.

d) The exporters are requested to provide their email to Customs so that they may be informed in the event of their authorization being selected for checks/ verification.

e) to bring transparency into the process of bond cancellation for Advance Authorisation, a verifiable record will be kept in respect of the applications received for bond cancellation with documents, and every 3rd day or earlier if required by quantum of EODC inflow, selection for checks will be made from the relevant applications and intimated to the exporters. Exporters are requested to share their e-mail addresses on the application.

The CBEC had actually issued these instructions on 02.12.2015 and the Board wanted the Chief Commissioners to give publicity to these guidelines through issuing public notice. Board had requested the Chief Commissioners to monitor the functioning on a monthly basis and ensure strict implementation.

It took just six months for the Public Notice to be issued.

Commissioner of Customs (NS-IV), JN Customs Public Notice No. 74/2016., Dated: May 23, 2016

Income Tax -Manner of determination of fair market value-CBDT Invites suggestions

UNDER section 9 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, income arising from indirect transfer of assets situated in India is deemed to accrue or arise in India. The provisions of section 9(1)(i) of the Act provides that if any share of or interest in, a foreign company or entity derives its value substantially from the assets located in India, then such share or interest is deemed to be situated in India. Thereby, any income arising from transfer of such share or interest is deemed to accrue or arise in India.

In this regard, draft rules and forms to be incorporated in the Income-tax Rules, 1962 have been formulated for comments from stakeholders and general public. The comments and suggestion on the draft rules may be sent by 29th May, 2016 electronically at the email address, ustpl1@nic.in.

F No 142/26/2015-TPL , Dated : May 23, 2016

 

CBSE Topper - IRS parents

THIS girl is relatively poor in Mathematics, English and Computer Science as she got only 99% marks in each of these subjects compared to the 100% she got in Physics and Chemistry.

That is Sukriti Gupta, this year's topper in CBSE XII class examination. She got a mind boggling score of 497 out of 500 marks!

Sukriti's parents Rakesh Gupta and Renuka Jain Gupta are both IRS (Income Tax) officers.

CBDT should honour Sukriti.

Until Tomorrow with more DDT

Have a nice day.

Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: CBEC initiative

It is ok that CBEC takes intiative to solve the issue. However, what the real problem is that the field formations thretens to stop business by denying clearance of import/export cargo.

"sub marj ki dava" deny clearance of transactions. this is what officials in field are doing. this reminds dialoge of a film Lajja - wherin the father of dulha, for creating pressure during marrige, keep saying now and there "uth jaye?"

CBEC should take intiative of refraining such officials from being obstacles for transactions. procedural matters, where clearity is not there, why transactions to be disturbed. only then ease of doing business will be there. otherwise, clearance of issue after two years has alrady disturbed business drastically, financially, as well as mentally, between different understanding of officials, experts, and consultants.

Posted by Anand Chauhan
 
Sub: Permission for factory stuffing of export cargo whether required or this is another case of Disease of doing business

What is the purpose of this permission? As per the verification report submitted by the Jurisdictional Central Excise to the Customs, the Central Excise officials will see the feasibility study of availability of space for container stuffing etc.

Now following question arises due to this procedure.

1. Central Excise rules allows “self-removal of goods” for domestic as well for export.
2. It appears that if factory stuffing permission is not taken than the assessee cannot remove the goods for export. Does this not in conflict with the Central Excise Law itself. What is meaning of self-removal if one cannot load the goods in a container or truck?
3. Whether a container is not a covered truck for all practical and legal purpose? Does loading goods in a refrigerated or covered container in a factory should need permission? In my understanding of the central excise law, there is no such requirement.
4. A manufacturer is allowed to stuff goods in a container for domestic clearance but for export permission is required for factory stuffing – under which law? There seems to be no law either in Central Excise and or in Customs Act/Rules. Actually Customs Act is not applicable as far as manufacturer of goods is concerned.
5. Even if a factory does not have enough space to load container inside the factory – can he not load the goods on the gate of the factory itself – whether it is mandatory that the vehicle should take a round inside the factory for export of goods?
6. What is the revenue safeguard in this permission?
7. Excise registered manufacturers are regulated under Central Excise Rules and are subject to audit each year by the Central Excise and CAG. Jurisdictional excise and preventive, anti-evasion teams also visits these factories occasionally/regularly – are they not aware of the existence of the factory?
8. ARE-1 is submitted to the Central Excise within 24 hours of removal of goods in case of self-sealing and in case of sealing by Central Excise officials, he himself seals the container – whether all this can be done without feasibility?
9. Further this permission will not be granted to the exporters exporting under “free shipping bills” – why do they need this?
10. Suppose one assessee has 50 factories in India and all are registered with central excise. Each unit will export through their local ICD/Customs Station – as per present Trade Notices in this regard each unit will apply for permission to their jurisdictional ICD/Customs.
11. Why such permission is not required for de-stuffing of container in a factory – whereas the container remains the same? If import consignment can be downloaded than export consignment can be loaded also.
12. See few of the many requirements for applying for this permission. And at many places it is written that the permission will be reviewed and may be cancelled for any violation etc. This means that goods are not allowed to be stuffed in a container even if you are well within the Central Excise laws and Customs Law?

(i) IEC issued to them by DGFT – this is mentioned on all the export documents and can be verified online. Always available on DGFT website and all documents (export or import)
(ii) PAN Card and Central Excise Registration Certificate (if applicable) – all these numbers are mentioned on the excise invoice – in fact it is mandatory to mention all these numbers.
(iii) Status Holder Certificate (if any)
(iv) RCMC certificate for non-excisable goods, if any – why a person of non-excisable goods would need the permission for factory stuffing?
(v) All of these documents shall be duly certified by authorized signatory of the exporter.
(vi) Permission will be given incentive scheme-wise – does this means many permissions to one factory?

(vii) Permission will be granted only on receipt of prior verification report regarding the genuineness of existence and functioning of the units and the No objection Certificate from the concerned jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities regarding deputing of officers for supervising the export stuffing – now what the Customs will do with this verification or the Central Excise has granted registration, collecting taxes from “nonexistence units”? Further whether presence of excise officers is required to stuff a container in this era of self-removal and self-sealing?

(viii) The Central Excise officers supervising the examination and stuffing of the cargo are required to follow the Examination Order and INSTRUCTIONS as being already followed – whether in case of self-sealing the excise officer can do this verification?

(ix) The exporters clearing goods under the factory stuffing permission shall invariably produce, at the time of goods registration at the port of export, a copy of the letter of FSP duly attested by the jurisdictional Central Excise officer along with the ARE-1 and other documents – do they see the factory stuffing permission before allowing export of “self-sealed cargo” that too duly attested by the central excise officer?

The application format and the conditions are such that an ordinary factory would not be able to understand and fulfill the requirements easily. Does this mean he should export at all? Such archival procedures continue till now and create more hurdles to the business but without any objective what so ever?


Posted by Schneider1 Schneider1
 

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.




Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.