TIOL-DDT 1458 · 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="3"><strong><font color="#663399" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL-DDT 1458 </font><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font></strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
<strong>04.10.2010 <br>
Monday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty on Cathode Ray Colour Television Picture Tubes </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> had imposed anti dumping duty on Cathode Ray Colour Television Picture Tubes originating in, or exported from Malaysia, Thailand, China PR and Korea RP vide <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2009/ctariff09_050.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 50/2009-Customs, dated the 15th May, 2009</a></strong></em>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">M/s. Meridian Solar & Display Company Ltd., (Producer or Exporter from Korea RP) had requested for review in terms of rule 22 of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 in respect of exports made by them, and the designated authority recommended provisional assessment of all exports of the subject goods made by the subject party in to India till the completion of the review. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">On the basis of the aforesaid recommendation of the designated authority, the Central Government had issued <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2009/ctariff09_144.htm" target="_blank">notification No. 144/2009-Customs on 23rd Dec 2009</a></strong></em>, ordering that pending the outcome of the said review by the designated authority the subject goods exported by the subject party when imported into India, shall be subjected to provisional assessment till the review is completed. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the Review is completed and the Designated Authority has recommended following amendments in the duty Table: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ against Serial No. 6, in column (6), the name of the Producer may be amended to read as M/s. Meridian Solar & Display Company Ltd. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ against serial no. 6, in column No. (7), the name of the exporter may be amended to read as M/s. Meridian Solar & Display Company Ltd. or/ and M/s LG International (S'Pore) Pte. Limited, Singapore. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And the Government has accordingly amended Notification No. 50/2009 – Cus. </font></p>
<p align="left"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2010/ctariff10_099.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">NOTIFICATION NO. 99/2010-CUSTOMS Dated: September 30, 2010 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Exemption to Goods Imported for Relief Operations in Ladakh </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has exempted all goods imported by the Lille Fro Foundation and intended for donation to the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council for the purposes of the relief operations in the Ladakh region, from the whole of the Customs Duty and Additional Duty of Customs. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The exemption is as usual subject to conditions: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The importer certifies that the goods are intended for such donation without making any charge. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The importer produces before the Deputy Commissioner or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case maybe, within six months from the date of importation of the said goods or within such extended period as the said officer may allow, but not later than one year from the date of importation, a certificate from the Chief Executive Officer of Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council that the said goods have been donated to the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council for use for the aforesaid purpose. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">God Forbid, if they forget to produce the certificate – all the might and power of the Customs will befall on them – after ten years. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Hospitals which imported some medical equipment under Notification No. 64/1988 are now doing the rounds in the corridors of the Tribunals and High Courts. </font></p>
<p align="left"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2010/ctariff10_100.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">NOTIFICATION NO. 100/2010-CUSTOMS Dated: September 30, 2010 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Government Issues Corrigendum to Notifications - which were already amended!!!</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Government has issued a corrigendum to <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2005/exnt05_024.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 24/2005 – Central Excise NT dated 13.05.2005</a> </strong></em>to replace “Valsad” with “Vapi”. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Similarly a corrigendum is issued to <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2005/exnt05_025.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 25/2005 – Central Excise NT dated 13.05.2005</a></strong></em> to replace “Valsad” with “Vapi”. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">These two notifications prescribe the jurisdiction of the Committees of Chief Commissioners and Committees of Commissioners to review orders passed by Commissioners. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But these changes have already been done by <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2010/exnt10_01.htm" target="_blank">Notifications 1/2010 Central Excise NT</a></strong></em> <em>and</em> <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2010/exnt10_02.htm" target="_blank">2/2010 Central Excise NT, both dated 06.01.2010</a></strong></em> respectively. Apparently, the Board does not have updated copies of the notifications and they have amended the notifications again by a corrigendum. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The fact is now, both notifications do not have the word, “Valsad” to be substituted.!!!!! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And recently the CESTAT dismissed a Departmental Appeal because there was no Commissioner at Valsad – Please see <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=44&filename=legal/cestat/2010/2010-TIOL-1038-CESTAT-AHM.htm" target="_blank">2010-TIOL-1038-CESTAT-AHM</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2005/exnt05_024.htm" target="_blank">Corrigendum to Notification 24/2005</a> and <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2005/exnt05_025.htm" target="_blank">Corrigendum to Notification 25/2005</a> </font></strong></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Disks, Tapes etc, exempted from Excise – DDT's Blunder </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>WHILE</strong> reporting <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2010/etariff10_32.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 32/2010-CX., Dated: September 28, 2010</a></strong> in <strong><a href="http://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=11478" target="_blank">DDT 1456 - 30.09.2010</a></strong>, it was stated, “The Government has exempted Discs, tapes, solid state non volatile storage devices, smart cards etc, <strong>fitted inside the CPU</strong> of a computer from the whole of the excise duty ....” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This was patently wrong. What was exempted was Microprocessor, Floppy Drive CD Drive etc, and did not certainly include smart cards; further the requirement was that they should be <strong>meant for fitment</strong> inside the CPU and <strong>not fitted</strong> inside as reported by <strong>DDT</strong>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This was pointed out by an alert Netizen. <strong>DDT</strong> deeply regrets the lapse and apologises for the same while profusely thanking the <strong>concerned</strong> Netizen for pointing out the lapse. There is no excuse for the lapse and all that we can say is SORRY. </font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Mayawati Triumphs in Tribunal </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>WITH</strong> boring regularity, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Madam Mayawati gets Crores of Rupees as gifts/donation on her birthdays. And with equally boring regularity, the Income Tax Department tries to bring these donations under the tax net, but ultimately it is Mayawati who smiles all the way to the bank. The ITAT had been confronted with this issue at least on three occasions and on all the three occasions, she had won hands down. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the latest case, the AO tried to tax the donations as professional income as her profession was politics. But the Tribunal held that she had a dual personality, one as a BSP Leader - politician and one in her personal capacity. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Tribunal held, “Income tax Act recognizes dual capacities of any assessee i.e. to acquire non taxable personal/capital receipts and taxable receipts, assessee in this case cannot be treated as an exception to this proposition. Revenues emphasis is to the effect that the assesses persona is inextricably linked with her politics therefore whatever she receives amounts to vocational receipts. In our view this view militates against the basic scheme of the income tax Act which prescribes that any person can have nontaxable receipts including gifts. Therefore, merely because assessee is in politics, Member Parliament and President BSP will not deprive her of ordinary treatment under income tax law. It cannot be held that her identification with politics or BSP is so total that she can no more have any personal identity” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Some 35 years ago the Supreme Court had held that politics is a profession – but more on that some other time. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We will bring you the ITAT order tomorrow.</font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">What is GIFT?</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NOTED</strong> jurist Nani Palkhiwala in his book “Law & Practice of Income Tax” based on numerous judicial decisions, has given a commentary as under : </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ A gift which has the personal element in essence is not income at all. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Gift to the office holder by way of remuneration for the office is taxable. But personal gifts given on personal grounds and as personal testimonial or as a token of personal esteem, respect, regard, veneration or to mark an occasion is not an income. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ A personal gift does not become income merely because it is repeated year after year. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Cancer and Corruption? </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THEY</strong> say 'corruption' is like cancer but it seems a lady Central Excise Superintendent in Mumbai who was arrested by CBI recently took to corruption because she was suffering from Cancer and perhaps the bills for treatment started piling up. DNA reports that all along she had been a rather upright officer and took to corruption only recently. That is why the CBI team which raided her house found nothing while her more enterprising colleagues were found with tons of money. It seems she started accepting bribes only recently. Such late entrants are the most prone to get caught! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But CBI did catch up with a more experienced colleague of hers. Also arrested with her was another Superintendent, but when his house was raided by the CBI, they found NOTHING. It seems somebody in the office had alerted his family of the raid and they quickly shifted the cash and other valuables and for four days the CBI had to go on a wild goose chase with no success. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But after four days of interrogation, the Superintendent voluntarily without any threat or inducement [read pure unadulterated third degree] confessed to the CBI that the money was hidden in a garment shop from where the CBI recovered cash and documents worth over One Crore Rupees. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The CBI is sure to trace the officer who alerted the Superintendent's family and charge him as an abettor after obtaining a 'willingly given' confessional statement. (which is not even evidence in a court) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A Deputy Commissioner caught with a bribe of Rs 5000/- is in jail not able to get bail for the last ten days! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Next time you take a bribe, please stop for a moment and consider the risk and question whether it is worth the risk – once you are caught, you have to be in jail in the company of criminals and your family has to bear the agony and consequences with you. And your life is miserable for at least ten years! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And the CBI will treat you far worse than the way you treat the persons summoned by you and who give you <em>free</em> and <em>willing</em> statements! </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"> – Tuesday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#663399" 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">Central Excise </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CENVAT Credit on service tax paid on mobile phones - entitled - High Court </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>INTERPRETING</strong> the provisions of 2004 Rules, the Central Board of Excise and customs has issued a circular on 23rd August, 2007 superseding all earlier circulars and has held that credit of service tax on mobile phones would be available under the 2004 Rules. No fault can be found in the order of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in granting credit of service tax paid on mobile phones. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><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">Section 143(2) - Delayed Notice not valid - Genuineness of Gifts - assessee's plea allowed foe earlier period - same grounds for subsequent period - Gifts are personal, not in pursuance of her profession or vocation of politics - In absence of any quid pro quo , such gifts cannot be held from vocation of politics - ITAT</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NO</strong> personal benefit has been promised or given to any donor, many of them are even not known to her, revenue's claim about quid pro quo or possibility thereof or assessee having influenced them to think so are all farfetched assumptions. The issues about the gifts being offered on party's call or its name on demand drafts, are not relevant inasmuch as AO has ultimately held these gifts as assessee's receipts and the dispute is in respect of head of income and personal versus professional receipt. Tribunal further added that gifts were given by all sorts of people, dalits, upper caste people, muslims from all walks of life. As already mentioned there were no obligations on the assessee to perform any duty toward donors and there was no quid pro quo, clinches the issue that gifts were received for personal qualities of the assessee and not from political vocation. </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">Settlement Commission has jurisdiction to settle Drawback issues - Drawback is nothing but remission of duty - High Court </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ONE</strong> cannot dispute that it is nothing but a remission of duty on account of the statutory provisions in the Act and scheme framed by the Government of India. Under these circumstances, the duty drawback or claim for duty drawback is nothing but a claim for refund of duty may be as per the statutory scheme framed by the Government of India or in exercise of statutory powers under the provisions of the Act. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Held</strong>: the Settlement Commission had jurisdiction to deal with the question relating to the recovery of drawback erroneously paid by the Revenue. </font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements </font></strong></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice day</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>