Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Section 11AC - There is no discretion vested in assessing authority, appellate authority or Tribunal to reduce penal amount, even if duty is paid before issue of notice – but penalty can be imposed only if ingredients of 11AC are satisfied – High Court

It is obvious that there is no rule of law applicable in blanket manner to the effect that if the amount of duty due has been paid before the issuance of show cause notice then the provision concerning interest or penalty would not be applicable. In the light of the absence of findings of clandestine removal of goods or any fraud, mis -representation, suppression of facts with the intention to evade duty, Section 11 AC of the Act read with Rule 25 of the Rules would not get attracted as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills's case.

Income Tax

Advance given by One PSU to another – No notional interest when there is no enforceable right to receive interest – ITAT by majority

There must be as is otherwise expressed debitum in prasenti, solvendum in future (see Greek and Latin above for meaning). Unless and until there is created in favour of the assessee a debt due by somebody, it cannot be said that he has acquired a right to receive the income or that income has accrued to him.

Customs

Testing laboratory cannot be held liable to penalty on charge of aiding and abetting in absence of any conscious knowledge in matter of mis -declaration or overvaluation of the goods by exporter: CESTAT

The appellant is a testing laboratory and their job is only to analyse the samples and accordingly to prepare a test report and the appellant has nowhere any role in mis -declaration or under valuation of the impugned goods.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements