Jurisprudentiol–Thursday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Central Excise

CENVAT Credit – Garden Maintenance Service has no nexus, even remotely, to manufacture or clearance of excisable goods, hence cannot be called Input Service – Tribunal

ANY manufacturer can manufacture excisable goods and clear the same from his factory without maintaining any garden. For this simple reason, it has to be held that garden maintenance services has no nexus, even remotely, to manufacture or clearance of excisable goods. In other words, the above service was not used, directly or indirectly, in relation to the manufacture or clearance of excisable goods.

Income Tax

IT – Deduction under Section 115 JB for MAT companies – 80% deduction under Section 80HHC correct - SYNCOME FORMULATIONS Ltd overruled – High Court

THE language used in section 115JB is deduction available under section 80 HHC. It is difficult to conceive of any rational reason as to why the legislature should have thought to give MAT companies additional benefits than the other companies who are paying tax on total income and not the tax based on book profit as calculated under section 115JB.

Customs

Confiscation of Gold – Adjudication order not received by the petitioner – appeals dismissed on limitation – Department has not proved that the order was properly served – directed to adjudicate the case on merits – High Court

FROM a reading of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, it is clear that the service shall be deemed to be effected, with regard to any document to be served by post, as provided by a Central Act or regulation, by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting by registered post, a letter containing the document. However, nothing has been placed before the Court to show that all the necessary ingredients, as stated above, had been complied with.

See our columns tomorrow for the judgements