TIOL-DDT 1380 · 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="left"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1380 </font><br> 15.06.2010 <br> Tuesday </strong></font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Supply of Pipes to Water Supply Project - Board <font color="#FF6633"><em>accepts</em></font> Supreme Court Order! </font></strong></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> </font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=34&filename=legal/cestat/2009/2009-TIOL-167-CESTAT-BANG.htm" target="_blank">2009-TIOL-167-CESTAT-BANG</a></strong></em></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">, the CESTAT, Bangalore Bench held that</font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Supply of pipes to Water Supply Project - exemption not restricted to the first storage point; available to subsequent points; in the impugned notification, pipes needed for delivery of water from its source to the plant and from there to the storage facilities have been exempted; the Notification merely talks about the storage facilities and there is no restriction that the water should be delivered only to the first storage point, as has been provided in the amended notification with effect from 01.03.2007; It is obvious that the unamended notification would have to be interpreted to cover the impugned pipes which were needed to deliver water not only to the first storage point but also to the second and subsequent storage point, such as elevated storage reservoirs where the water was further treated for chlorination. If it was the intention of the government to restrict the exemption for pipes up to first storage point, the notification should have been accordingly worded from the beginning. </font></em></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Naturally Revenue is not satisfied with such orders and took the matter to the Supreme Court – as usual with a belated appeal. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court condoned the delay but dismissed the Revenue Appeal <strong><font size="1"><em>[</em></font></strong></font><font size="1"><em><strong><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=32&filename=legal/sc/2009/2009-TIOL-140-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank">2009-TIOL-140-SC-CX</a>] </font></strong></em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The benign Board has <font color="#FF6633"><em><strong>accepted</strong></em></font> the Supreme Court order! </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In a communication to the <font color="#FF6600"><strong>concerned</strong></font> Commissioner, on a reference made him, the CBEC has informed that the “ Board has accepted the order of the Supreme Court ” </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">What is this concept of the Board <font color="#FF6633"><strong>accepting</strong></font> the order of the Supreme Court? Can the Board reject or refuse to accept an order of the Supreme Court? Isn't the order of the Supreme Court, the law of the land and, binding on everybody including the mighty Board? Isn't it contempt of the Supreme Court to state that the Board has accepted its order? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Many an officer feels that a Supreme Court order is binding on him only if the all-powerful Board accepts it. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The other day, addressing a gathering of assessees, an Additional Commissioner of Central Excise remarked that the Courts did not understand the legislative philosophy and were striking down tax provisions. He went on to advise the assessees not to rely on these Court orders and pay up taxes whenever the Department was kind to demand them! And it came to our notice that this particular officer has more respect for the Reserve Bank of India than the Supreme Court of India. He could be easily persuaded by the pieces of paper signed by the RBI Governor (also known as currency notes) than by the erudite orders passed by the judges of the Supreme Court, who do not understand the tax laws as much as our learned Revenue Officer! </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Even when Revenue has contemptuously decided to accept the Supreme Court order, shouldn't it make the acceptance public through a Circular? In this case, only one Commissioner was informed that the Board has accepted the Supreme Court order. Other Commissioners are free to issue SCNs blissfully ignorant that Board has been kind enough to the Supreme Court by accepting its order! </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why can't the Board maintain a database of the cases disposed of by High Courts and Supreme Court and whether Board has accepted those orders and make this information available in the public domain so that the Department and the assesses will know the correct position. </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>TIOL</strong> will be happy to be associated with the Board – and freely. </font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chief Commissioners Conference Today </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FINANACE</strong> Minister Pranab Babu is to address the Annual Conference of the Chief Commissioners & Directors General of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, today. Tomorrow the MOS, Palanimanickam is to address the top brass. The Conference will discuss on five major areas of governance in the realm of indirect taxation. </font></p> <blockquote> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Issues pertaining to GST implementation </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Human Resources </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Improving Productivity </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Vision – I - for efficient Revenue Management </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Vision-II - for Facilitation and improved Tax Payer Services. </font></p> </blockquote> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do these conferences produce any results?</font></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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"> – Wednesday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><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"><strong><font color="#663399">Customs</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Professional broadcasting equipment for live telecast of Mumbai marathon – whether covered under category of sports goods and sports equipments – Condonation of delay - acceptance of explanation furnished should be rule and refusal an exception – COD allowed and matter remanded: CESTAT </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ATHLETIC</strong> Federation of India, (AFL) the appellant had imported professional broadcasting equipment for live telecast of Bombay Marathon in the year 2007 and 2008. The appellant claimed the benefit of exemption under Sr.no. 1 of Notification 146/94 dated 13.7.94 which covers sports goods, sports equipment and sports requisites along with their spares, accessories and consumables. In the two impugned orders-in appeal passed, the Commissioner (Appeals) has taken a view that appellants are not eligible for exemption since the goods imported were broadcasting equipment and are not covered under the category of sports goods and sports equipment. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Prosecution - Tribunal's decision is not binding on Trial Court trying the case: Madras High Court</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> question before the High Court is - Whether for quashing prosecution proceedings u/s 245 of CrPC , sub- judice before the lower court it is mandatory to record evidence as per the provisions of section 244(1) of Cr.P.C . Whether the decision of the ITAT is binding on the trial court trying the case of prosecution. The answers to both the questions are NO </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Central Excise </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Even if statute provides for an appeal remedy, if principles of natural justice are violated, party aggrieved for such violation can invoke jurisdiction of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India: High Court of Madras. </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> petitioner is a manufacturer of Leather Die cutting Knives and is a sole proprietorship firm. The goods were sold to another sole proprietorship firm of her husband who in turn sold the knives to the buyers. Department demanded duty by adopting the price at which these goods were sold by the husband's firm. The Tribunal upheld the demand, but remanded the matter for re-computation of duty liability after extending the cum-duty benefit and CENVAT Credit. The rectification application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the CESTAT. Thus, the assessee is before the High Court. </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice Day. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" 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"><strong>vijayWrite@taxindiaonline.com</strong></a></font></p> </body> </html>