TIOL-DDT 1583 · 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 1583</font><br> 05.04.2011<br> Tuesday</strong></font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Controversial Cricket Cup 2011 - CBEC Clarifies </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC), Ministry of Finance has denied that the original ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 trophy is lying in the Airport Customs Warehouse in Mumbai. The clarification was issued in response to the report appearing in certain section of media that actual ICC Cricket World Cup trophy has not been awarded to the winning India Cricket team at Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai on Saturday, 2nd April, 2011. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Clarification states, </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"ICC has also confirmed that the trophy presented to Indian Cricket team at Wankhede Stadium on Saturday, 2nd April 2011 was original ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 trophy and the one that was always intended to be presented to the winner of the event. It has further added that the trophy seized by Mumbai Customs is the promotional, perpetual trophy which remains in the keeping of the ICC at its headquarters in Dubai. It carries the generic ICC corporate logo rather than the logo specific to the 2011 event. That trophy will be reclaimed today and will travel back to Dubai with ICC staff as was always intended. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The Central Board of Excise & Customs (CBEC) has further informed that two passengers by the name of Mrs. Emma Waite and Mr.RixonHeyder, arrived by Flight 9W 255 on 1st April, 2011 at Mumbai airport from Colombo. They were carrying a trophy in their personal baggage which was claimed to be 'ICC Perpetual Trophy'. All goods and equipments imported temporarily for the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 tournament, a list of which was given by the ICC Tournament Committee, have been exempted from customs duty. However, the list given by the ICC Tournament Committee did not cover the aforesaid trophy which was claimed by the passengers to be 'ICC Perpetual Trophy'. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> To remove all doubts, the concerned Customs officer(s), therefore, contacted the ICC Tournament Director and enquired about the said 'trophy', so that appropriate action could be taken expeditiously and the matter resolved. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> In response, Professor R.S. Shetty, Tournament Director, ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 vide his letter dated 1.4.2011 addressed to Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Sahar, Mumbai informed that: </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> i) The 'trophy' in question was not to be used for any purpose inside the country for the ongoing World Cup; </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> ii) It was being carried by Mrs. Emma Waite and Mr.RixonHeyder as their personal baggage and that it would have been taken back to the ICC Headquarters on completion of their assignment in India;</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> iii) That the trophy shall be collected by the above passengers on their way back to their destination; </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> A request was also made in the letter of Professor Shetty that the Customs office may hold the trophy in the Customs warehouse at the Mumbai Airport till it is collected by the above passengers on their return. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> It is, therefore, clear that the trophy meant for the winning side has been given to the winning side and an avoidable controversy appears to have arisen in the matter." </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> But then how did the other trophy reach the Wankhade Stadium? Was it cleared by Customs? </font></strong></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/cbec_press_release.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Press Release dated April 4, 2011</font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">POT (Point Of Taxation) Rules - Mistake Corrected</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=12329" target="_blank">DDT-1581-01.04.2011</a></strong> had pointed a major error in the amendment to the POT Rules. It was mentioned, The intention is to give an option to the assessee to come into POT from today or 1st July 2011. But the rule says, "Nothing contained in this sub-rule shall be applicable…". The only problem is that there is no 'sub-rule' . What they should have written is, " Nothing contained in these rules …" </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the Good Board has corrected this mistake, as suggested by DDT. "sub-rule" is changed to, "these rules…" </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=40&filename=notification/servicetax/2011/corrigendum_25_2011.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Corrigendum dated April 4, 2011</font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">POT (Point Of Taxation) Rules - continuous supply of service - Notified</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"<strong>CONTINUOUS</strong> supply of service" is defined as any service which is provided, or to be provided continuously, under a contract, for a period exceeding three months, or where the Central Government, by a notification in the Official Gazette, prescribes provision of a particular service to be a continuous supply of service, whether or not subject to any condition; </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government has notified the following services as "continuous supply of services" </font></p> <blockquote> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. zzq - Commercial or industrial construction. </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. zzzh - Construction of complex </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. zzzx - Telecommunication service </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">4. zzzu - Internet Telecommunication Service. </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">5. zzzza - Works contract service </font></p> </blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=40&filename=notification/servicetax/2011/stnot11_028.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">NotificationNo.28/2011-ST., Dated: April 1, 2011 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Amendment Regulations - Amended </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC</strong> has amended the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Amendment Regulations.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Low value dutiable consignment" has been defined as an import consignment (other than documents, gifts and samples) of an invoice value not exceeding one lakh rupees. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The requirement of passing the CHA Examination is extended up to 31st December, 2011 </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2011/cnt11_026.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 26/2011-CUSTOMS (N.T.), Dated : April 01, 2011</font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Common Adjudicating Authority Appointed for DRI Case</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> CBEC has appointed the Joint Commissioner or Additional Commissioner of Customs (Import), Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, NhavaSheva, to act as a common adjudicating authority for the purpose of adjudicating the matters relating to Show Cause Notice pertaining to M/s Max-Pure Water Systems Pvt. Ltd., and others, issued vide F.No . DRI/AZU/INV-09/2009 dated the 26th April, 2010. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2011/cnt11_027.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 27/2011-CUSTOMS (N.T.), Dated : April 01, 2011 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ITAT President as High Court Judge - Challenged </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IT</strong> is learnt that the Delhi High Court Collegium had recommended the name of RV Easwar, President of ITAT for appointment as a judge of the Delhi High Court. But it seems the recommendation has been challenged in the Delhi High Court. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ITAT and CESTAT members gain invaluable experience in the Tribunals and they are eminently qualified to become judges of the High Court and even Supreme Court. There should be a small quota for CESTAT and ITAT Members for appointment as judges of the High Courts and Supreme Court. This will strengthen the Tax Benches of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. Not every judge understands taxes or can understand taxes and it will surely add to the stature of the High Court to have an experienced Tribunal Member in the Tax Bench. </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><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">Addition of cost of re-usable containers in AV of 'Bisleri' water assessed under sec 4A - remand order passed by Bench was not to be understood as a green signal for blindly accepting CA's certificates - it was incumbent upon Commissioner to have audit of accounts u/s 14A - Matter remanded: CESTAT</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN </strong>the earlier round of appeal, the CESTAT had remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision on the valuation issue. The issue in the previous round was whether the refundable deposit collected by the assessee (respondent) through their dealers from the ultimate consumers of "Bisleri" water packed in 5 litres and 20 litres containers were liable to be included in the MRP under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for the purpose of levy of Central Excise duty during the period from January, 2000 to April, 2001. </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">Whether when a profit-making company advances huge amount of money as subsidy to loss-making subsidiary, it falls within four walls of Sec 37, and thus, allowable business expenditure - NO, rules High Court </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> issue before the High Court is - Whether when a profit-making company advances a huge amount of money as subsidy to its loss-making subsidiary, it falls within the four walls of Sec 37, and hence, is allowable as business expenditure. NO is the answer. </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service Tax </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Laying pipelines for Gujarat Water Resources Development Corporation; not taxable; However appellant paid tax and took CENVAT Credit - No penalty for wrong credit: CESTAT</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>YOU</strong> are doomed if you dont pay Service Tax. What happens if you pay it? You are still doomed.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The appellants were awarded a contract by Gujarat Water Resources Development Corporation Limited, Gandhi Nagar under the Sujalam Sufalam Spreading Canal Pipe Line Project for laying pipe lines from Adundra to Kherwa. The appellants by considering the said service as falling under the category "Commercial or Industrial Construction Services" paid the service tax on the same after availing the benefit of CENVAT credit and filed due service tax returns with the department. </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 Time.</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>