Jurisprudentiol – Monday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

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 CENVAT credit - Department seeking recovery of CENVAT credit availed - Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT

THE 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 .

Income Tax

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

THE 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.

Customs

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

THE 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.

See our columns Monday for the judgements