Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Service Tax

Maintenance and Repair of Roads – Exemption from 27.7.2009 is only prospective – High Court.

THE notification dated 27.7.2009 cannot be given retrospective effect in the absence of specific and express provision as held by the Supreme Court in the decision reported in 2006-TIOL-146-SC-CUS-LB (Commissioner of Customs v. Spice Telecom). Thus, the notification dated 27.7.2009 granting exemption from levy of service tax to road maintenance and repairs is to be held only as prospective. It is for the Government to consider whether a notification should be given retrospectively, and if so, up to what period and unless it is so provided, the Tribunal or even the High Courts have no power to grant retrospectivity for a notification in the interpretation process.

Income Tax

Sec 119 - Condonation of delay on account of delayed appointment of auditors for statutory audit - CBDT should avoid pedantic approach - taxpayer should not suffer on account of technicalities: Bombay High Court

THE issue before the HC is - Whether delayed appointment of CAs to replace departmental auditors for statutory audit u/s 44AB is good enough reason for condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b); Whether, for condonation of delay, CBDT should avoid pedantic approach and Whether Revenue should take care that assessee should not suffer on account of technicalities. And the verdict has gone against the Revenue.

Central Excise

Commissioner (Appeals) as well as CESTAT have committed a grave error in reclassifying capital goods and allowing CENVAT Credit – Madras High Court

CENVAT Credit - Capital goods – Capital goods classified by the supplier manufacturer under Chapter heading 8429 which is excluded from the definition of capital goods as given under Rule 57 Q - The Commissioner (Appeals) and the CESTAT have committed a grave error in reclassifying the goods under Chapter heading 8428 and allowing the credit - Question of law answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements