TIOL-DDT 1006 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1006</font><br>
05.12.2008<br>
Friday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Resurrection Again - Anti Dumping Duty on Sulphur Black</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Provisional Anti Dumping Duty was imposed on Sulphur Black, falling under heading 3204 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, originating in, or exported from, the People's Republic of China by Notification No. <a href="http://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2008/ctariff08_048.htm" target="_blank"><strong>48/2008-Cus.</strong></a>, dated 11-4-2008. This Notification was to be effective upto and inclusive of the 10th October, 2008.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If they wanted to continue this levy they should have extended it before 10.10.2008 and in fact the Designated Authority by his Notification No. 14/16/2006-DGAD dated the 24th September, 2008 had recommended the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of the subject goods - a good 17 days before the Anti Dumping Notification expired.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But obviously the powers that were sleeping and they forgot to extend the notification, which they have now done.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Incidentally the Law and the Courts have taken into consideration the fact that babus may forget to extend the validity of dying notifications and have provided for such resurrection. If the government can retrospectively validate a dead notification, why fix a time limit for the death - why can't they simply state that it would be valid till withdrawn? Notification No. 48/2008 specifically mentioned that it will be valid till 10th October 2008 and now they have brought it back to life two months after it was supposed to have died.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2008/ctariff08_127.htm" target="_blank">Notification NO. 127/2008 - Cus Dated: December 03, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Step-motherly Treatment for Service Exporters</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Excise Act was enacted in 1944 and after 50 years, tax has been imposed on services vide Finance Act 1994. Thus the manufacturers are nearly 50 years older than the output service providers and may be this is the reason why Board while taking seriously the delays in sanctioning of refund claims to the manufacturer exporters, has turned a blind eye to the Output service exporters.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The manufacturer exporters can claim refund of service tax paid on certain notified services used for export of goods under Notification <strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=40&filename=notification/servicetax/2007/stnot07_041.htm" target="_blank">41/2007-ST</a></strong>. Vide F. No. 341/15/2007-TRU Dated: April 17, 2008, instructions were given to the filed formations to dispose of the refund claims on priority basis and called for a report in the following format to be submitted by the Commissioners to the Chief Commissioners.</font></p>
<div align="justify">
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="41"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Sr. No. </font></p></td>
<td valign="top" width="115"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Name of the exporter </font></p></td>
<td valign="top" width="146"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Date of filing of refund claim </font></p></td>
<td valign="top" width="141"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Amount of refund sought </font></p></td>
<td valign="top" width="218"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Reason for delay in processing the refund claim </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, the exporters of output service can claim refund of service tax paid on the input services used for the output service read with notification <a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2006/exnt06_05.htm" target="_blank"><strong>5/2006 CE(NT)</strong></a> dated 14.3.2006. Though Board has issued a Circular No. <a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2006/excircular828.htm" target="_blank"><strong>828/5/2006-CX.</strong></a>, dated 20-4-2006 to sanction 80% of the claim; these instructions are rarely followed by the field as the officers granting the refunds are treated as terrorists for targets and revenue by the department. <strong>DDT </strong> has learnt that many exporters are facing difficulties in getting the refunds and strangely, while the Board has taken seriously the refunds for manufacturer exporters and called for a report, there are no such instructions in respect of refunds under Notification <a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2006/exnt06_05.htm" target="_blank"><strong>5/2006 CE(NT)</strong></a> except an eye-wash circular to grant 80% refund which is flouted left right and centre by the field.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The world is already witnessing the effect of recession to which Indian Industry is not immune; withholding the refunds on frivolous grounds would have serious impact on the Trade at this difficult time. An executive of an MNC told DDT "We operate on wafer thin margin of less than 10% in respect of our Indian entity and imagine the plight of the company if 12% service tax refund is held up".</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Hope someone in the Board listens to the woes of Service Exporters.</font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A New Central Excise Commissionerate in Guwahati</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It
seems a new Central Excise Commissionerate is being formally launched in
Guwahati today. Why? As such there are nearly seventy five posts of Commissioners
lying vacant and where are they going to find a Commissioner to head Guwahati
Commissionerate? Is it because the Shillong Chief Commissioner does not have
enough Commissioners under him? As such there are many Commissionerates in
the Kolkatta and North East Zone with revenue less than 50 Crores and God
alone knows why a new Commissionerate had to be suddenly foisted in the North
Eastern region?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">With so many Commissioners posts lying vacant, the Board should think of closing down some Commissionerates and at least as an economy measure when the whole world is suffering, this new Commissionerate is a classic case of wasteful expenditure. Now they will start looking for buildings, cars, computers, carpets, curtains and what not to decorate a Commissionerate which most probably will not have a Commissioner.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Or is that the Board wants one more posting to dump unwanted Commissioners as a punishment? What happened to austerity measures? One wonders whether the new Finance Minister is aware or are they doing it to please him in his constituency?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_113.htm" target="_blank">Notification NO. 113/2008 - Cus (N.T.) Dated: October 16, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Export of Military Stores - DGFT clarifies</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per policy at Table A (S. No. 4) of Schedule II of ITC(HS) Classification of Export & Import items, 2004-09 the export of 'Military Stores' requires a "No Objection Certificate from Department of Defence Production (MoD)" is required except in respect of goods as specified at Export Licensing Note 1 which are freely exportable.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Instances have come to notice of DGFT where export of 'Military Stores' have been allowed by Customs field formations without 'No Objection Certificate' from the Department of Defence Production.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, now it is reiterated that no export of goods, which are apparently in the nature of 'Military Stores' may be allowed without No Objection Certificate from Department of Defence Production, by all units including EOU/EHTP/STP/BTP units.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTAyMzA=" target="_blank">Policy Circular No. 45 (RE-08)/2004-2009, Dated: December 4, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Deferred Payment Protocols dated April 30, 1981 and December 23, 1985 between Government of India and erstwhile USSR</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The rupee value of the special currency basket has been fixed at Rs. 62.5050 with effect from November 10, 2008. Earlier it was Rs. 65.4398.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="https://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2008/rbi08cir038.htm" target="_blank">RBI Circular No. 38/RBI., Dated: December 4, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Jurispruden</font><font color="#FF6633" size="5">tiol</font><font color="#006600">- Monday's cases</font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><strong><strong><strong><strong><strong><strong><b><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_hammer.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="100" height="84" hspace="5" border="0" align="left"></b></strong></strong></strong></strong></strong></strong></strong></font></strong></font><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Service Tax</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Service tax - Registered society exempt from Income Tax does not come under purview of 'commercial coaching or training centre' - 'Commercial' in statutory definition qualifies 'coaching or training centre' and not 'coaching or training' - Service tax not leviable: CESTAT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> department initiated proceedings against ASCI (Administrative Staff College of India) for non-payment of service tax on certain services rendered by ASCI by categorizing them under 'Commercial coaching or training service' and 'Scientific or Technical consultancy service'. The Commissioner confirmed a service tax demand of Rs. 1,59,86,170/- along with interest and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 150/- per day under s. 76 of Finance Act, 1994 along with a mandatory penalty equivalent to tax under s. 78. Tribunal concluded that ASCI's services cannot be regarded as a 'commercial coaching or training service' and its research projects do not come under the purview of 'scientific or technical consultancy service'.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>MODVAT credit not to be included in total turnover for purposes of computing eligible deduction under Sec 80HHC of Income Tax: Delhi High Court</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> High Court held that excise duty is not to be included in computing total turnover for the purposes of Section 80HHC. The modvat credit availed and adjusted against the duty payable by the assessee, is nothing but excise duty in itself through another duty collecting procedure; such modvat credit cannot be included in the total turnover for the purposes of computing the eligible deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Customs</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Moulds and dies are not synonymous - Extrusion dies are not Moulds and are correctly classifiable under heading 8477 90 00 - Benefit of notification <a href="http://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2004/ctariff04_085.htm" target="_blank">85/2004-Cus</a> not available: Tribunal</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BEFORE</strong> the Tribunal, the appellant submitted that Commissioner(A) has erred in classifying the imported dies under Chapter heading 8477 90 00 by relying upon section 2(b) of Section XVI inasmuch as the goods in question are nothing but moulds as moulds and dies are synonymous.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See our columns Monday for the judgements</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday with more<strong> DDT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice Weekend.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mail your comments to </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="mailto:vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com</a></font></p>
</body>
</html>