TIOL-DDT 1592 · 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 align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1592 </font><br>
</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>20.04.2011 <br>
</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Wednesday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Import of Sugar - Exemption till 30 th June 2011 </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has notified exemption to import of sugar as follows, which will not be applicable on or after 1 st July 2011. </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>1.
Raw Sugar</strong>: If imported by a sugar factory or a sugar refinery:
If imported by any person other than a factory or refinery, the importer
shall produce to the Deputy/Asst Commissioner of Customs, a valid contract
or agreement with a sugar factory or sugar refinery for refining of such
raw sugar and shall furnish a bond to the effect that the said raw sugar
shall be used for the said purpose. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>2.
Refined or white sugar</strong>: If the importer produces before the
Deputy/Asst Commissioner of Customs, a proof to show that the contract
for import of such sugar is duly registered with Agricultural & Processed
Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA)”. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>3. Raw sugar imported by a bulk consumer</strong>: If the importer, at the time of import, produces a certificate from a Chartered Accountant to the effect that the importer is a bulk consumer. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2011/ctariff11_034.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 34/2011-CUS, Dated : April 15, 2011 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Anti Dumping Duty on Acetone - Yet another Resurrection! </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>EASTER </strong>is just less than a week away and it marks the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus rose from the dead on the third day after his crucifixion, but for the CBEC, every day is Easter - they perform the miracle of resurrecting dead notifications, especially those relating to Anti Dumping. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Provisional Anti Dumping Duty on imports of Acetone originating in, or exported from, Thailand and Japan, was imposed by Notification No. 45/2010 - Cus dated 9 th April 2010. This Notification very clearly mentioned that the Anti Dumping Duty imposed under this notification shall be effective up to and inclusive of October 8, 2010. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So the notification expired on 9 th October, 2010. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board was in deep slumber for six months. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now they have imposed definitive anti dumping duty on these goods for a period of five years, but from the date of provisional anti dumping, that is 9 th April, 2010. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But what happens during the period 9 th October 2010 to 17 th April 2011. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Should the irresponsible slumber the Revenue officers cause untold misery to the importers? Just because they assume reprehensible retrospective powers, do they have the power to legally harass the citizens? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Does anyone ever ask the Board officials as to why they failed to extend the notification's validity before its expiry or is sleeping one of the privileges conferred on the babudom? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2011/ctariff11_036.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 36/ 2011- Cus., Dated: April 18, 2011 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Conditions and modalities for registration of contracts of Assam Comilla Cotton with DGFT</font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AS </strong>per Notification No. 32(RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 14.03.2011 export of 5000 bales of Assam Comilla Cotton (Tariff Code 5201 00 12) has been exempted from the ceiling of 55 lakh bales imposed on export of cotton during the Cotton Season, 2010-11 (upto 30.09.2011). Thus, export of this 5000 bales of Assam Comilla Cotton, ITC(HS) Code 5201 00 12 is “Free” subject to registration of export contracts with DGFT. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Procedure for registration of contracts has been prescribed by DGFT. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=46&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10cir029.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Policy Circular No. 29/(RE-2010)/2009-14 Dated: April 19, 2011 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Revenue Targets - Tax Payers break their heads - CBEC Better than CBDT </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A</strong> <em>concerned </em> Netizen reacted rather with anguish to our story, <strong>FM pats CBDT and CBEC Chairmen for exceeding even Revised Revenue Targets. </strong>He says, </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>It is, I believe, now known as to how CBDT and CBEC officers collect the money from the tax payers. First the demands are raised on the points/issues which are baseless and flimsy. Thereafter, Coercive measures are used to extract the money from tax payers. Many a time there are arithmetical errors in the assessment orders. The officers are just not at all willing to correct the errors and instead insist for first depositing the demanded sums as per order. Some of the officers are so unfair that they directly attach the bank accounts, especially the season is February and March, without even notifying the tax payer about its intention to do so. Because of the collection pressure on the officers justice is just for the name sake. The department just going on raising unjustified demands. When it comes to refunds. The refunds are delayed during last quarter of the year. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Now the question arises ‘does the FM wants the targets to be met in this manner and then pat the back of the department?' Or the Finance Minister is unaware of ground realities and hardships caused to the tax paying community. In any case, FM ought to be aware of such practices. So is he also giving a deaf ear and blind eye to the Industry in such a case. Whatever be the proportion of such collection, Government should not forget that whole of the tax is paid by this community and the tax payer must be given fair treatment, if not respect. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>The Government should really think that life is not going to end this year. If the tax is really due it will come in the next year. Next year also there are going to be revenue targets. This target pressure is really creating lot of unjust and inconvenience to assessees. I am sure many of the officers must not be doing it willingly and happily. The Government should focus on enabling the Industry for growth and the collections will automatically increase. This will also reduce a lot of avoidable litigation. Let there be REAL increase and do away with the pressure tactics. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>There has been noticeable change in CBEC over the years and such measures are not very common. It is more common in income tax. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Let the tax payer spend that much time and effort in generating and increasing the business and thereby real revenue. </em></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>'Construction of Complex Services' - Pune III Commissioner Clarifies </strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong> </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Pune III Central Excise Commissioner staes that: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>With effect from 1-7-2010 (the Finance Act, 2010), an explanation has been inserted below sub-clause (zzzh) of section 65(105) to clarify that unless the entire consideration for the property is paid after the completion of construction (i.e. after issuance of completion certificate by the competent authority), the activity of construction would be deemed to be a taxable service provided by the builder/promoter/developer to the prospective buyer and the service tax would be charged accordingly </em>. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And he clarifies that: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(a) <em>Where services of construction of Residential Complex were rendered prior to 1-7-2010 no Service Tax is leviable in terms of para 3 of Boards Circular number 108/02/2009-S.T., dated 29-1-2009. The Service of Construction of Residential Complex would attract service tax from 1-7-2010. Despite no service tax liability, if any amount has been collected by the builder as "Service Tax" for Services rendered prior to 1-7-2010, the same is required to be deposited by the builder to the Service tax department. Builder can not retain the amount collected as Service Tax. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(b) <em>For services rendered after 1-7-2010 for which payment has been or is made after 1-7-2010, service tax is leviable and builder is liable to deposit the service tax to the service tax department. The only exception to this is provided within the parenthesis () in the "Explanation" in para 3. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(c) <em>For services rendered after 1-7-2010 for which payment was made prior to 1-7-2010, service tax has been exempted by the Govt. based on documentary evidence vide notification no. 36/2010-S.T., dated 28-6-2010 as amended. Therefore, this benefit can be availed by builders on the basis of documentary evidence. </em></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=41&filename=notification/servicetax/2011/construction_trade_notice.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III, Trade Facility No. 1/2011, dated 15-2-2011 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Income Tax returns 2011 - Only Colour Forms; No Black and White </font></strong></font><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong> </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FOR</strong> the new Income Tax returns, <em>No Black and White forms will be accepted and only standard forms with appropriate colors prescribed, fonts used, paper size, paper quality, Bar Code Values will be accepted by the department </em>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The specifications are: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1.Size of the paper should be A4 Sheet- <strong>(8.268 inches by 11.693 inches / 210mm by 297 mm ) </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.Quality of the paper should be White Paper and above 70GSM. The Paper thickness should be of Executive Bond quality with a minimum of 70 GSM and above </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3.Registration Marks should be present at every page and the coordinates of the same are indicated in the Sample Form given in Annexure A. It should be 0.25” from the top edge and the left corner edge. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">4.There should be a series of square dots which should be placed on the both sides of the pages on every page. The distance of the same should be 0.32” from the left edge. The square dots are uniformly spaced at 3mm distance from each other </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">5.Bar Code Specifications should be in Code 39 Format. The Position and Size of the Bar Code should be as Per Annexure A </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_sample.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="489" height="660" hspace="5" border="0" align="center"></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"> - Thursday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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"><font color="#663399">Central Excise </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Credit - dutiable and exempted goods - Demand for the period prior to 2005 - As duty was paid within the stipulated time, no interest and penalty: High Court </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THOUGH </strong>the amendment was retrospective in nature, the penalty being penal in character cannot be retrospectively imposed and therefore, the tribunal has rightly set aside the order imposing the penalty. In so far as the payment of interest is concerned, as is clear from the terms of the amended provisions, it is payable in the event of the assessee not paying the amount held to be due under the order within the period stipulated therein. In the instant case even before the tribunal order, substantial amount was paid and the balance amount was paid within the period stipulated. Therefore, there is no cause for levy of interest. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Whether loss arising out of derivative transactions carried on recognised stock exchange in FY 2003-04 constitutes loss from speculative transaction as contemplated u/s 43(5) - NO, rules Bombay High Court </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong>issues before the Bench are - Whether the loss incurred from the derivative transactions carried on, on a recognized stock exchange during the year 2003-04 would constitute loss from speculative transaction as contemplated u/s 43(5) of the Act and whether the clause (d) inserted to the proviso to Section 43(5) has retrospective effect. And the verdict goes against the assessee. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Service Tax </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Maintenance of software - Not taxable before 1.6.2007 - Board's Circular No. 81/2005-S.T, not applicable: High Court </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IT</strong> is clear that till the advent of the Finance Act, 2007, the information technology which included maintenance of computer software, had been outside the purview of 'business auxiliary service', especially under section 65 and the term, 'goods' in the Finance Act, 2007 has included 'computer software' under section 65(105) (zzg). However, under the impugned circular the Board placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in <em>Tata Consultancy Service v. State of Andhra Pradesh </em>to conclude that software being goods, any service relating to maintenance, repairing and servicing of the same is also liable for service tax. The impugned circular is declared to have no application to the petitioner, as the same is opposed to the provisions of the Finance Act insofar as it relates to imposing of service tax on software relating to maintenance, repairing and servicing under the Finance Act, 1994. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">See our columns tomorrow for the judgements </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until tomorrow with more DDT </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Day. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><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">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com </a></font></p>
</body>
</html>