Import of waste paper – DGFT's further Clarification
Vide Policy Circular No.82 (RE-08)/2004-2009 dated 28.4.2009, it has been clarified that the applications for import of waste paper submitted to MOEF are to be accompanied by the certificate of independent Pre-Shipment Inspection Agency.
DGFT further clarifies that the pre-shipment inspection certificate shall state that imported material is only waste paper etc. and is free from any hazardous waste including municipal waste, bio-medical waste etc.
A list of Pre-Shipment Inspection Agencies have been notified by DGFT under Appendix-5 of Handbook of Procedures Vol.I. Though these agencies are enlisted for the specific purpose of conducting pre-shipment inspection of metal scrap, it is felt that many of such enlisted agencies may have capability to carry out pre-shipment inspection of waste paper also. Accordingly, trade and industry is advised to seek pre-shipment inspection from only those agencies who are enlisted in Appendix-5 of Handbook of Procedures Vol.I.
Any new agency desiring to enlist under Appendix-5 for pre-shipment inspection of waste paper may apply to DGFT according to provisions cited there.
DGFT Policy Circular No. 88(RE-08)/2004-2009 Dated: May 06, 2009
Appellate Authorities should dispose of Stay Applications expeditiously; so long the stay application is not disposed of, the Assessing Officer must be slow or reluctant in initiating recovery process.- CBDT directed to issue Circular – No recovery during pendency of stay petition - High Court
An issue is pending with the Commissioner (Appeals) which includes a stay petition. The Commissioner (Appeals) does not decide but the Department is not ready to wait.
A very familiar situation, though the CBEC had issued a circular that coercive steps should not be taken while the matter/stay is pending with Commissioner (Appeals), there seems to be no similar CBDT circular and there is a petition in the High Court.
The High Court observed that the inaction on the part of the CIT(A) cannot be appreciated but has to be condemned in the strongest words.
So the High Court directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to hear the stay application and dispose of the same within a period of 15 days from this date. However, it is expected that no coercive action will be taken against the petitioner meanwhile.
The High Court observed,
we have experienced a flood of such writ petitions, where the petitioner having filed appeal along with the stay application before the authority concerned have waited for some time but the appellate authority has failed to pass any order whatsoever on the stay application and in the meantime the assessing authority had proceeded to make recovery which causes in filing of a number of writ petitions before this Court.
This can be avoided by the authorities concerned showing more concern to their duties and by disposing of such stay applications expeditiously and in any case within a reasonable time.
For inaction of the authorities, this Court is being flooded with avoidable litigation which is causing more harm to public at large who is waiting for dispensation of justice within a reasonable time from the highest Constitutional Court in the State.
This Court is already burdened with lacs of cases awaiting their turn for disposal.
The constraint in which this Court is functioning is being added by this inaction of the authorities and is causing delay in disposal of huge number of cases.
We do not propose to make this order an occasion to illustrate the various reasons for delay but we will be failing in our duty if we refrain from showing our concern to such callousness on the part of the revenue authorities in sitting tight over the stay application compelling the assessee to run to the High Court by filing writ petition simply to get an order for expeditious disposal of the application for interim order.
If they have some justification for not deciding the stay application for some time, it would be in the fitness of things that in such cases, the assessing authority, if it has received the information that the assessee has approached the appellate authority by filing appeal along with the stay application which is pending, must await the recovery till the decision is taken by the appellate authority on such stay application.
So the High Court directed the Central Board of Direct Taxes, to look into this aspect of the matter and, if necessary, to issue a circular to all the appellate authorities directing them to dispose of stay applications expeditiously and so long the stay application is not disposed of the Assessing Officer must be slow or reluctant in initiating recovery process.
See