News Update

GST - Penalty demand of Rs.3731 crores - A person who would fall within the purview of sub-section (1-A) of s.122 should necessarily be a taxable person who retains the benefits of transactions: HCGST - Threatening and pressurising petitioner who is merely an employee - Highly unconscionable and disproportionate on the part of the officer: HCGST - Same relief was claimed in earlier petition which was withdrawn unconditionally - Fresh petition seeking same relief is barred by the estoppel principle: HCIncome tax hands over Rs 1700 Cr tax demand to Congress PartyGST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCStage-2 of Vikram-1 orbital rocket successfully test-firedGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCHouthis claim UK has not capability to intercept their hypersonic missilesGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCIsraeli forces kill 200 Palestinians at Gaza medical complex & arrest over 1000GST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerCus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTAT

MESSAGE BOARD

   

CX - Rule 18 accords rebate of duties paid on goods that are exported & do not distinguish between exempted goods and dutiable goods - lower authorities have erred in adopting approach which is redolent of opportunism: CESTAT


Fallacy regarding export of taxes

The subject judgement contains the following observation:
'It is the stated doctrine in tax administration that domestic taxes are not exported with goods.'
The judgement does not state as to in which provision of law the said 'doctrine' is 'stated'. It is also hard to fathom the basis of elevating the said statement to the status of ' doctrine'. As the said 'doctrine' has been found mentioned in several judgements, it is appropriate to indulge in a brief purgatory exercise.
The GOI rebates/refunds indirect taxes in relation to the exported goods wherever/ whenever it deems it to be in public interest so to do. It is done only when it is in public interest and not in pursuance of any such 'doctrine'. Indirect taxes on petroleum products used in the manufacture of exported goods are not rebated/refunded, ( these taxes are not cenvatable either), and thus, in effect, are exported. Obviously the GOI does not consider it in public interest to do so. Also on several goods, export duties are imposed which constitute clear examples of export of indirect taxes. While a longer discourse may be in order, for the purpose of this comment, suffice to say that the 'stated doctrine' is nothing but a creature of shallow understanding and is lapped up by adjudicators as it is couched in a catchy phrase appealing to common sense but it has no legal basis/support and is of no value for the purpose of interpretation of legal provisions relating to indirect( or direct) taxation.
In fairness I must add that the said judgement remains soundly reasoned to arrive at the right conclusion even if the reference to the ' stated doctrine' is ignored

M K Gupta 03/01/2017

 
Re :Fallacy regarding export of taxes

Sir,

The Commerce Minister Ms. Nirmala Sitharman in a written reply in the Rajya Sabha on 6.8.2014 said,

"One of the guiding principles of FTP is that the taxes should not be exported. Therefore, exporters are granted access to duty free raw material or are provided refund of duties paid in manufacture of exported products."

Please also see DDT 2412 - 07.08.2014

Vijay Kumar

Vijay Kumar 03/01/2017

 

Back

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