TIOL-DDT 1139 · 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> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1139</font><br> 24.06.2009<br> Wednesday</strong></font></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Singapore Exemption – Rates reduced</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NOTIFICATION NO.</strong> 74/2005-CUSTOMS, dated the 22nd July, 2005, exempts goods imported from Singapore in excess of 25% of the applied rate of duty. This is made ‘nil' now.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Similarly Notification No. 75/2005-CUSTOMS, exempts certain other goods, in excess of 65%. Now this is made 50%.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"applied rate of duty" means the standard rate of duty specified in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, read with any other notification for the time being in force, issued in respect of such goods under sub-section (1) of section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 10/2008-Customs dated the 15th January, 2008 exempts over 500 items imported from Singapore at various effective rates – these rates are also now reduced.</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/2009/ctariff09_069.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 69/2009- Cus ., Dated: June 19, 2009</a> and</strong> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2009/ctariff09_070.htm" target="_blank"><strong>Notification No. 70/2009- Cus ., Dated: June 19, 2009</strong></a></font></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Safeguard Duty imposed on Aluminium Flat Rolled Products</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government had imposed provisional Safeguard duty on import of Aluminium Flat Rolled Products falling under heading 7606 and Aluminium Foils falling under heading 7607, from People's Republic of China, by Notification No. 26/2009-CUSTOMS, dated the 23rd March, 2009.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now on the recommendations of the Director General (Safeguard), the Government has imposed definitive safeguard duty on imports of Aluminium Flat Rolled Products and Aluminium Foil into India from People's Republic of China.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Consequently, Notification No. 26/2009- Cus, is rescinded.</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/2009/ctariff09_071.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 71/2009- Cus ., Dated: June 19, 2009</a> and</strong> <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2009/ctariff09_072.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 72/2009- Cus ., Dated: June 19, 2009</a></strong></font></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">New UN/EDIFACT message facilitates Single Window developments</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The UN Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business (UN/CEFACT) and the World Customs Organization (WCO) announced that a new message had been created for the lodgement of information related to cross-border trade ultilising a Single Window to deliver data once only to regulatory agencies.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This new EDIFACT message was approved, but subject to final audit by UN/CEFACT, at its most recent meeting in Rome. It will be known as the Government Cross-Border Regulatory (GOVCBR) message.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">WCO Secretary General Kunio Mikuriya said, “<em>The development of such a message is a significant step forward in assisting administrations to implement a Single Window environment as envisioned by both the WCO and UN/ CEFACT.</em>”</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Consistent with UN/CEFACT Recommendation 33 on establishing a Single Window to enhance the efficient exchange of information between trade and government, the WCO will be producing message implementation guidelines for Customs authorities on how to use GOVCBR, as part of the release of Version 3.0 of the WCO Data Model which is due to be launched towards the end of the year. The Data Model will be aligned with the UN/CEFACT Core Component Library.</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">–Thursday's cases</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font><font color="#663399">Central Excise</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6600">Inputs exclusively used for manufacture of exempted final products – once the 8% amount is paid under rule 6 of the CCR , 2004, the credit cannot be questioned – CESTAT </font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Single Member Bench after hearing both sides observed that the issue stood settled against the Revenue in a plethora of cases, one of which is the <em><strong>Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. vs. CCE, Mumbai</strong><strong> [<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=34&filename=legal/cestat/2007/2007-TIOL-534-CESTAT-MUM.htm"><font size="1">2007-TIOL-534-CESTAT-MUM</font></a>] </strong></em>rendered by West Zonal Bench, Mumbai, and which is binding on him.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">Income Tax</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6600">Minimum Alternative Tax - carry forward is available for a total of six years - It is trite law that statutory provisions prevail over a Circular in case of contradiction between the two: ITAT</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IT</strong> is trite law that statutory provisions prevail over a Circular in case of a contradiction between the two: The period of 'five assessment years', mentioned in sub-paragraph (2) contradicts with what is stated in sub-section (3) of section 115JAA. It is trite law that statutory provisions prevail over a Circular in case of a contradiction between the two. This position was reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of <em>Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Ratan Melting & Wire Industries.</em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">Customs</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6600">Whether demurrage charges are includable in the assessable value prior to 26.9.2006? – Matter referred to President for constitution of Larger Bench – CESTAT</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong> issue relates to inclusion of demurrage charges in the assessable value. Netizens may please recall our earlier stories on this issue <strong>(<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=1603"><font size="1">THE B(L)INDING EFFECT OF BOARD CIRCULARS ON REVENUE</font>! </a>and <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=3085"><font size="1">SHIP DETENTION CHARGES - STILL IN DEEP WATERS!</font></a>)</strong>. In the famous IOCL case, the department lost revenue of Rs 975 crores because of a Board Circular dated 14.8.1991, which had clarified that the demurrage charges are not includable in the assessable value. In 2001, vide another Circular No 14/2001 dated 02.03.2001, it was clarified that the demurrage charges are includable in the assessable value. However, consequent to the IOCL judgement, another circular No 26/2006 dated 26.9.2006 was issued stating that the assessments for the period after 02.03.2001 should be finalised by including the demurrage charges. In a recent case before the Tribunal, revenue filed appeal against the non-inclusion of demurrage charges for the period 21.6.2001 to 5.2.2002. It is the contention of the revenue that after the issue of Circular No 14/2001, demurrage charges are includable in the assessable value.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice day.</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>