TIOL-DDT 1052 · 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 1052</font><br>
13.02.2009<br>
Friday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Foreign Trade Policy – FMS - Acceptance of Tracking Report – DGFT Clarifies</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per Para 3.20.3 of the Hand Book of Procedures Vol.I (RE 2008), Applicant shall be required to submit proof of landing of export consignment in specified market. Duty Credit scrip shall be granted on FOB value realized as per BRC/FIRC.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Any one of the following documents should suffice, as a proof of landing of export consignment in specified Focus Market:</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">i. A self attested copy of import bill of entry filed by importer in specified market, or</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ii. Delivery order issued by port authorities, or</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">iii. Arrival notice issued by goods carrier, or</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">iv. <strong>Tracking report from the goods carrier duly certified by them, evidencing arrival of export cargo to destination Focus Market</strong>, or</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">v. Lorry receipts of transportation of goods from Port into the Focus Market, or</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">vi. For Land locked Focus Market, Lorry receipts of transportation of goods from Port to Land locked Focus Market, or</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">vii. Any other documents that may satisfactorily prove to RA concerned that goods have landed in/reached the Focus Market.<br>
<br>
</font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">References have been received from the Trade and Industry on the issue as to whether a Tracking Report, down loaded from the website of a goods carrier and duly certified by its accredited agent is an acceptable document under para 3.20.3(iv) of HBP Vol. I or not.</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT has clarified that</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Certification by goods carrier includes certification by its authorized agent in India. Accordingly, Tracking Report, down loaded from the website of the concerned goods carrier, and duly certified by goods carriers accredited agent(s) in India is an acceptable document under para 3.20.3(iv) of HBP Vol. I. Such a Tracking Report should evidence the arrival of export cargo from India to destination Focus Market. This clarification applies on exports made from 1.4.2006 onwards and shall also apply to Market Linked Focus Product Scheme under Para 3.10.7 & 3.10.8 of FTP.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now why should this document downloaded from the website be certified by the Carrier's Indian Agent?</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=46&filename=notification/dgft/2008/dgft08cir060.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Policy Circular No. 60 (RE-2008)/2004-2009 Dated: February 12, 2009</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Tribunal Members – What is their Pay Status?</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Technical Members of the CESTAT are either former Commissioners or Chief Commissioners in the Customs and Central Excise Departments. When they sacrifice the frills of a field office to take up the difficult task of listening to confusing arguments day in and day out and then passing complex orders, they richly deserve a good salary, at the least.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now what is the position?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The VI CPC report mentioned as follows:-</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">7.15.19 The Members of the Tribunal are presently in the pay scale of Rs.22400 -26000. They have demanded the higher pay scale of Rs.24050-26000. The Commission has recommended merger of the pay scales of Rs.22400 -26000 and Rs.24050 -26000 in the revised pay band PB-4 of Rs.39200-67000 along with a grade pay of Rs.13000. This will automatically meet the demand.</font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So the CESTAT Members wanted to be on par with the CBEC/CBDT Members – fair enough. When Chief Commissioners are joining the CESTAT, they should at least get a small salary hike.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government was a little more generous and instead of the suggested scale of Rs. 39200-67000 along with a grade pay of Rs. 13000/- the government sanctioned a separate pay scale of Rs.75500 - (annual increment @ 3%)-80000 designated as HAG+.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But while the Members of CESTAT were asking for a scale equal to that of Member, CBEC; the CBEC Members wanted a higher scale – that of Secretary – Rs. 80,000/- per month.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Pay Commission had recommended, <font color="#FF6600">The Government should consider upgrading the post of Member, CBDT presently in the scale of Rs.24050 -26000 to the revised apex pay band of Rs. 80000 (fixed)</font>.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government most graciously accepted this suggestion and now Members of the CBEC and CBDT are equal to Secretary to the Government of India and Members of CESTAT and ITAT are again one step below.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">When DDT reported about the up-gradation of Members of CBEC and CBDT to the rank of Secretary with a pay of Rs. 80,000/-, we got a mail from one of our prominent Netizens with a question, <strong>Now, after the revision, how does a CESTAT member compare with Judge of a High Court in terms of salary?</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let's Compare the scales for some top posts in India.</font></p>
<div align="justify">
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Sl. No </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Post </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Scale/Pay (Rs.) </strong></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>1. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chief Justice of India </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">100,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>2. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Judges of the Supreme Court of India </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">90,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>3. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Cabinet Secretary </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">90,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>4. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chief Justices of High Courts </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">90,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>5. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Judges of High Courts </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">80,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>6. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Secretaries to Government of India (including Chairmen and Members of the CBDT, CBEC and Railway Boards) </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">80,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>7. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CESTAT/CBDT Chairmen </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">80,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>8. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CESTAT/CBDT Members </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">75,500 – 80,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>9. </strong></font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chief Commissioners of Income Tax and CBEC </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">37,400 –67,000 with a Grade pay of Rs. 12,000. </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In this complicated world, it is really difficult to fix salaries and ranks of such senior dignitaries. A few rupees may not make much of a difference, but what really matters is facilities which are so unfairly denied to the Members of CESTAT and ITAT.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Pay Commission had recommended, <strong>The Government should, however, take a view regarding extension of facilities like residential library, stenographic assistance on par with that available to Members of CAT to the Chairman and Members of ITAT.</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government should seriously consider these proposals.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>You have to run very fast if you want to remain where you are. </strong>(Alice in Wonderland)</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">–Monda'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>Income Tax</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AO does not allow deduction of total interest expenditure from total interest income – Assessee files revised return apportioning HO expenditure to EOU and non- EOU based on assets thereby getting more tax benefit - no reason to doubt bona fide of assessee – apportionment correct: ITAT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN </strong> its return of income filed for the year under consideration, the assessee company had claimed a deduction of Rs.17 ,13,63,585 /- under Section 10B in respect of its 100% export oriented unit (EOU) at Mundra , Gujarat. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee company has earned interest income of Rs.898.81 lakhs during the year under consideration. The said interest income, however, was not shown by the assessee company separately in its profit & loss account and the same was adjusted against interest expenditure of Rs.5,774.18 lakhs thereby debiting the finance charges to the profit and loss account at the net amount of Rs.4875.37 lakhs (Rs.5774.18 lakhs - Rs.898.81 lakhs).</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Service Tax</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Courier service company collected Service Tax from clients but did not pay to Government for four long years – No cause for reduction in mandatory penalty u/s 76 - Tribunal sets aside Comm (A)'s order and allows Revenue appeal.</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THIS </strong>is a Revenue appeal in a Service Tax case. Revenue is aggrieved that the Commissioner(A) was wrong in reducing the penalty imposed by the lower adjudicating authority.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The respondent is an established courier company. They provided courier services to their customers and collected the Service Tax from them but did not pay the same to the Central Government. This, they could manage to do for nearly four years.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">On being pointed out, they paid the Service Tax. They also paid the interest due.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Needless to mention, a demand notice followed and which also proposed imposition of penalties under sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.</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="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice Weekend.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" 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>