TIOL-DDT 1428 · 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><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1428</font><br>
20.08.2010 <br>
Friday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Can Government Officials use Private Email ids for Official Correspondence? </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>SOMETIME</strong> ago I got a mail from a concerned Netizen, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“I
notice, most of the officials in the CBEC/C.Excise/Customs give their personal
email ids for getting the response/reply from the public. How can the
Board/Dept. ensure that the emails received by their officers in to their
personal email ids are forwarded to the other officers for necessary
action. When the Govt. has the CBEC website, why cannot they get email ids
with <em>xxxxx.cbec.gov.in or xxxx.cenex.gov.in/cus.gov.in</em>. Why none
of the Members of CBEC nor respective Chief Commissioners thought of giving
email ids to their Members/Officers in the field which is more secure and
can be accessed by the other officials? I am sure, <strong>TAXINDIAONLINE</strong> can
take up this matter with concerned and in future, we all can send our suggestions/reply
to the official email ids and not to their personal email id.” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I replied to him, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“We
had already taken up this matter several times – the officers express a lot
of difficulties in accessing their official mail ids and they don't have
the many features that gmail, yahoo etc have. Once we insist that they use
only official email id, what will happen is, they will not share their personal
ids and they will not open the official ones. I am told that the Department
is planning to give an email id with digital signature to every officer.” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">That was one year ago. Recently while reporting the 'Draft Point of taxation Rules', in <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=11233" target="_blank">DDT 1418 -06-08-2010</a></strong>, I asked, “why are the government officers using private email ids and not the government ones.?” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And it is is understood that our comments are not taken kindly by the officers who use private email ids for official correspondence. Gmail is the hot favourite mail server for many government officers – maybe for its user friendly environment, but the moot question is, “should government business run through these private unsecured mail servers?” We understand that some Government Ministries have already banned the use of private email ids for official communication. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">There may be nothing wrong in a government officer using a private email id for official communication, but the pride of the Government of India is involved. When a government officer uses a private email id, it means that he has no faith in the government id or the government is not able to provide him a reliable email id, both of which are shameful to the majesty of governance. And can the use of a private email id for official communication be treated as unfair promotion of a private enterprise by government? Tomorrow Google can advertise that many government officers in India use Gmail as their official mail! </font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Powers of CBI </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CENTRAL</strong> Bureau of Investigation (CBI) can suo-moto register and investigate cases of corruption including against officers of the Central Government, in the Union Territories. CBI requires consent of the concerned State Government for operating in that State. However, prior permission of the Central Government is required under section 6(A) of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, before conducting any inquiry or investigation of the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, alleged to have been committed by the officers who are : </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(i) the employees of the Central Government of the Level of Joint Secretary and above; and </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(ii) such officers as are appointed by the Central Government in corporations established by or under any Central Act, Government Companies, Societies and local Authorities owned or controlled by that Government. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">No permission under Section 6(A) of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 is required in case of arrest of an officer at the spot for accepting or attempting to accept a bribe. <br>
<br>
CBI derives its powers of registration, investigation and prosecution of cases from the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This was stated by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Shri Prithviraj Chavan in written reply to a question in Rajya Sabha yesterday. </font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Private Taxis masquerading as Government Cars – Red Beacon and all</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ONE</strong> of the perks of babudom is a government car. Many in Government believe that Commissioners and above are entitled to a car with a red beacon. Sate Governments have repeatedly clarified that they are not entitled to this feudal legacy. But IRS officers have been illegally getting their old Ambassador cars fitted with these red beacons. Now the Government has stopped buying cars and have allowed the Commissioners to hire taxis. Commissioners are hiring fancy taxi cabs and getting them fixed with red beacons and boards like, “Central Government”, “On Government Duty”, etc,. These are illegal activities and senior officers like Commissioners should not be seen in indulging in such activities. </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"> – Monday'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">Central Excise</font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mixing Argon and Hydrogen gas – Assessee treating mixed gas as being a manufactured product in view of section 2(f) of the CEA, 1944 read with chapter note 9 in Chapter 28/38 and paying duty by availing <em>CENVAT credit</em> - Department seeking recovery of <em>CENVAT credit</em> availed - Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> appellants are mixing Argon and Hydrogen in their unit and the mixed gas is supplied through pipe line for welding purposes. The department's contention is that such mixing does not amount to manufacture as one of the gases viz. Argon is an inert gas and there is no chemical reaction possible. The department's stand is purportedly supported by the earlier decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut vs. Goyal Gases (P) Ltd . </font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Income Tax </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sec 147 - Can proceedings be initiated u/s 147 even when time available for issue of notice u/s 143(2) has not expired? - NO, says ITAT Third Member </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> issue before the Third Member of the Tribunal is - Whether the proceedings u/s 147 cannot be initiated when the time available for issuing notice u/s 143(2) has not expired. </font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">FOREIGN
TRADE POLICY - Target Plus Scheme – 'broad nexus' between import goods
and exported goods – FTP cannot be amended by Circulars and Public Notices – Customs
Circulars and DGFT Public Notices quashed: Delhi HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> impugned circulars and notice that purported to 'clarify' the term 'broad nexus, i.e. the impugned circular dated 8th May 2007, the Public Notice dated 21st June 2007 and the further circular dated 19th December 2007, travelled beyond what was envisaged by para 3.7.6 of the FTP and severely restricted the benefit thereunder. It was a significant change that could be brought about only through a notification under Section 5 FTDR Act. The said circulars and public notice were, therefore, ultra vires para 3.7.6 of the FTP. Further they sought to retrospectively take away a benefit that had accrued to the exporters which cannot but be viewed as unreasonable in the context. The impugned circular dated 8th May 2007, the Public Notice dated 21st June 2007, the further circular dated 19th December 2007 and the amended para 3.2.5 of the HBP are accordingly quashed. </font></p>
<p align="left"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Monday for the judgements </font></strong></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Weekend </font></p>
<p><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>