Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Just making an entry in a wrong place can take you up to High Court – Gujarat HC dismisses revenue appeal on 'assessee taking credit of duty paid on raw material in PLA instead of CENVAT account'.

YOU can never afford to take the revenue departments lightly. A minor omission which has absolutely no revenue implication can take you up to High Court or even to the Supreme Court. In this case, the assessee is a manufacturer of CR Coils. The raw material used is HR Coils. The assessee obtained the raw material HR coils without payment of duty under Rule 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for use in the CR coils meant for export. However, whenever the CR coils meant for export were cleared for home consumption, the assessee paid duty on the raw material, HR coils and also on the final products, CR coils. The assessee is entitled to take credit on the duty paid on HR coils. But, instead of taking credit in CENVAT account and using it for payment of duty on CR coils, the assessee made the entry in PLA itself.

Income Tax

Insurance Premium paid by a partnership firm on a Keyman Insurance Policy is allowed as expenditure of the firm: Bombay HC

THE issue involved in the revenue appeal is whether the ITAT was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) allowing the Insurance Premium paid on Keyman Insurance Policy as expenditure. The ITAT had held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee, which is a partnership firm, in paying the premium for a Keyman Insurance Policy obtained by the firm on the life of its partner must be regarded as expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the business of the firm.

Sales Tax

Show Cause Notice does not become illegal and void just because it allowed less time to reply - It was always possible for appellant to seek for further time: SC

THE issue in the present appeal is whether the show cause notice issued by the respondent is illegal and defective as the same did not provide for a time period of 15 days as prescribed in the statute and also because it did not disclose materials leading to the satisfaction of the concerned authorities justifying the issuance of such a show cause notice.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements