SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

World Energy Congress 2024: IREDA CMD highlights need for Innovative Financing SolutionsVoter turnout surpasses 50% by 4 PM in Phase 2 pollsST - Amendment made to FA, 1994 on 14.05.2015 making service tax applicable retrospectively on chit-fund business is only prospective - Refund payable of tax paid between 01.07.2012 to 13.05.2015: HCXI tells Blinken - China, US ought to be partners, not rivalsST - SVLDRS, 2019 - Amnesty Scheme, being of the nature of an exemption from the requirement to pay the actual tax due to the government, have to be considered strictly in favour of the revenue: HCCX - Issue involved is valuation of goods u/r 10A of CE Valuation Rules, 2000 - Appeal lies before Supreme Court: HCCus - Smuggling - A person carrying any article on his belonging would be presumed to be aware of the contents of the articles being carried by him: HCCus - Penalty that could be imposed for smuggling 3.2 kg of gold was Rs.88.40 lakhs, being the value of gold, but what is imposed is Rs.10 lakhs - Penalty not at all disproportionate: HCCus - Keeping in mind the balance of convenience and irreparable injury which may be caused to Revenue, importer to continue indemnity bond of 115 crore and possession of confiscated diamonds to remain with department: HCCus - OIA was passed in October 2022 remanding the matter to adjudicating authority but matter not yet disposed of - Six weeks' time granted to dispose proceedings: HCI-T - High Court need not intervene in matter involving factual issues; petitioner may utilise option of appeal: HCChina asks Blinken to select between cooperation or confrontationI-T - Unexplained cash credit - additions u/s 68 unsustainable where based on conjecture & surmise alone: ITATHonda to set up USD 11 bn EV plant in CanadaImran Khan banned from flaying State InstitutionsI-T - Income from sale of flats cannot be computed in assessee's hands, where legal possession of flats had not been handed over to buyers in that particular AY: ITATPro-Palestine demonstration spreads across US universities; 100 arrestedI-T - Investment activities in venture capital which are not covered in negative list under Schedule III to SEBI Regulations, qualifies for deduction u/s 10(23FB): ITATNATO asks China to stop backing Russia if keen to forge close ties with WestNY top court quashes conviction of Harvey Weinstein in rape case
 
Unclaimed payment of Deficit Court fee - Avert adverse fallout

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, MAR 24, 2017: THE Commissioner, Directorate of Legal Affairs, CBEC by his letter F.No. 1080/45/DLA/2015-16/2459 dated November 8, 2016 had informed that only a handful of payments (135 Nos) of Deficit Court fee have been remitted by the Commissionerates.

Enclosing a list of appeals filed after 19/08/2014 till 13/04/2016, it was requested that payments of deficit court fee be expedited   at least in cases which are still pending in the Supreme Court.

Following points were also impressed upon -

+ Date of filing may be confirmed to identify the appeals in which deposit of deficit court fee is mandatory.

+ The valuation taken for calculation of deficit court fee is only the duty portion of the revenue which is being contested in Supreme Court. Interest, penalty is kept out of its ambit as per guidelines. The fee is calculated as per schedule III in the Supreme Court notification dated 27.05.14.

+ The Central agency section, Ministry of Law has verbally communicated that   deficit court fee of the pending appeals may be remitted beforehand to avert any adverse fallout in litigation . [See DIRECTORATE OF LEGAL AFFAIRS CBEC F.No.1080/45/DLA/2015-16/1976., Dated: September 14 2016]

+ In case of any difference between the registry & Commissionerate figures of deficit Court fee, the same may please be resolved by visiting the Central Agency Section or the Registry Section III, Supreme Court of India with the said paper book for explanation.

+ Directorate of Legal affairs has procured a list of remittances (as on 29.06.2016) from Stock Holding Corporation of India by various Commissionerates which are   lying unclaimed   against which no E-Court fee stamp has been drawn for deposit of deficit court fees. This ‘unclaimed amount' totals Rs.9,74,000/-.

Two days back the Directorate of Legal Affairs, CBEC has once again sent out a communication in the matter of ‘unclaimed payment of deficit court fee'.

The letter reads:

Directorate of Legal Affairs has procured a list of remittances ( up till 20/02/2017) to Stock Holding Corporation of India by various commissionerates which are lying unclaimed against which no E-Court fee stamp has been drawn for deposit of deficit court fees. The said unclaimed deposit amount and date is produced below for identification by respective Commissionerates for immediate communication of corresponding UTR No. to Directorate of Legal Affairs for deposit of the relevant court fee.

In this list, against 18 entries, the total amount involved is a staggering Rs.50,21,818/- and some entries are more than a year old.

Should the department allow such callousness to continue when public money is involved and that too when all that is required is a bit of reconciliation.


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
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.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



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

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST