TIOL-DDT 1670 · 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 1670 </font><br>
10.08.2011 <br>
Wednesday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Construction of Staff Colony not liable to service tax - Covered by exclusion clause under definition of ‘Residential Complex' - Commissioner (Appeals)</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> assessee entered into a contract with service recipient for construction of Staff Colony Buildings to be used as staff quarters by the staff of service recipient. Department alleged that the assessee was liable to service tax under Construction of Complex Service and issued show cause notice proposing demand of service tax with interest and levy of penalties. Lower authority confirmed the demands resulting in this appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The appellant primarily contended as follows: </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per the exclusion clause given under the definition of 'Residential Complex' in Section 65 (91a) of the Finance Act, 1994, the term 'Residential Complex' would not include a complex which is constructed by a person directly engaging any other person for designing or planning of the layout, and the construction of such complex is intended for personal use as residence by such person. In this case they have constructed flats and houses for service recipient as per the drawings supplied by the latter and these are to be used as Staff Quarters by the service recipient. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">After considering the submission of the appellant and the relevant statutory provision, the Appellate Commissioner observed as follows: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“…….. In the instant case there is no dispute that the residential complex was constructed for the staff ……….It is the intention of the legislators to tax only the residential complex……….It is matter of common knowledge that service tax is an indirect tax which has to be collected from the recipient and then it is to be paid by the service provider. In the instant case M/s …….(service recipient) cannot collect the value of service tax from anyone since there is no sale involved. Hence, according to the exclusion clause, complex meant for personal use is not taxable. Again, since there is no specific definition with regard to term "person" it has to be construed that term "person" includes artificial/juristic person ……………..Therefore, the exclusion clause is rightly available to service recipient. In addition to the above, the decision of Tri-Ahmedabad in the case of <em>Khurana Engg. Ltd vs. CCE Ahmedabad <strong><font size="1"> </font><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=44&filename=legal/cestat/2010/2010-TIOL-1712-CESTAT-AHM.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2010-TIOL-1712-CESTAT-AHM</font></a></strong></em> is squarely available to the issue on hand. But the only difference is that in the above case the person referred is GOI whereas in the case on hand it is the company and hence the case is directly on the issue. TRU Circular dated 24.5.2010 (Supra) also supports the issue on hand.” </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In fine, the Appellate Commissioner held that the appellant was not liable to service tax and allowed the appeal. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=40&filename=notification/servicetax/2011/commr11_01.htm" target="_blank">Order of Commissioner (Appeals) </a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Taxability of expenditure in foreign currency in case of M/s ONGC Videsh Ltd - CBEC Clarifies </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC</strong> was burdened with a query from a field formation, which expected a clarification in this regard from the Board. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">After examining the query, Board observed that the matter that has been referred in the said letter is a question of fact which has to be examined in the light of overseas contracts, joint venture agreements, mandate of OVL and its overseas formations etc. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board clarifies that it is not supposed to determine such complex questions of facts on the basis of a short summation of facts that have been communicated by the field. The Commissionerate is in possession of all the facts of the matter and best equipped to determine such issues. Therefore, it directed the jurisdictional officer to go ahead in the matter as deemed appropriate in terms of law. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board directs that in future, issues relating to question of facts must not be forwarded to the Board and thus keeping the matter pending on this ground alone. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=41&filename=notification/servicetax/2011/circular_ongc_fc.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Letter F.No.137/147/2010 - Service Tax : Dated : July 11, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Production Costs of Petro-Products - Petroleum Minister clarifies </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> cost of production by Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC) and Oil India Limited (OIL) in the year 2010-11 is USD 37.29 per barrel and US$ 27.76 per barrel respectively. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The net crude oil price realized by ONGC and OIL during 2010-11 was USD 38.35 per barrel and USD 41.41 per barrel respectively. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The elements of sale price of crude oil per barrel during the financial year 2010-11 for ONGC and OIL are as under: </font></p>
<div align="justify">
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Particulars </font></strong></p> </td>
<td valign="top" colspan="2"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">USD per barrel </font></strong></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ONGC </font></strong></p></td><br>
<td valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">OIL </font></strong></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Gross Price </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">89.41 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">89.53 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Less: Discount </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">35.65 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">28.67 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Net Price after discount </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">53.76 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">60.86 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Less: Cess (including NCCD*, Education Cess) </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">8.25 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">8.06 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Less: Royalty </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">5.45 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">9.07 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Less: VAT & CST </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1.71 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.32 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Net Realized Price </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">38.35 </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">41.41 </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">*National Calamity Contingency Duty (NCCD) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Refining is a process industry, where crude oil constitutes around 90% of the total cost. Crude oil is processed through several processing units such as Crude Distillation Unit (CDU), Vacuum Distillation Unit (VDU), Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU), Hydro Cracker Unit, Lube Unit etc. Each of these units produce intermediate product streams, which require extensive reprocessing and blending. Petroleum products are processed from blend of various intermediate streams. The blending of intermediate products streams from various units for making finished petroleum products results in difficulty in apportioning the total cost to individual refined products with accuracy. Therefore, individual product-wise costs are not identifiable separately. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The actual cost of production is not available separately for petrol and diesel. However, the oil marketing companies pay Refinery Gate price, when they purchase Petrol and Diesel from refineries. Refinery Gate price is based on Trade parity, which is the weighted average price of Import Parity Prices and Export Parity Prices in the ratio of 80:20. Refinery Gate Price for Delhi as on 1.8.2011 is as under:</font></p>
<div align="justify">
<table width="300" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Product </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">RTP (Rs./ Ltr.) </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Petrol </font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">35.39* </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Diesel</font></p></td>
<td><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">37.46 </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">*As per the information received from Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per the written response to a question in the Rajya Sabha by the Minister for Petroleum & Natural Gas Shri S. Jaipal Reddy </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Investment in units of Domestic Mutual funds by 'Qualified Foreign Investors' </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> terms of Schedule 5 to the Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or Issue of Security by a Person Resident outside India) Regulations, 2000 notified vide Notification No. FEMA 20 / 2000 -RB dated May 3, 2000 as amended from time to time, a SEBI registered Foreign Institutional Investor (FII) and Non Resident Indian (NRI) may purchase, on repatriation basis, units of domestic Mutual Funds (MFs), subject to such terms and conditions mentioned therein and limits as prescribed for the same by the Reserve Bank and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), from time to time. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In consultation with the Government and the SEBI, RBI has decided to allow non-resident investors (other than SEBI registered FIIs and SEBI registered FVCIs) who meet the KYC requirements of SEBI, hereinafter called ‘Qualified Foreign Investors' (QFIs), to purchase on repatriation basis rupee denominated units of equity schemes of domestic MFs issued by SEBI registered domestic MFs in accordance with the terms and conditions as stipulated by the SEBI and the RBI from time to time in this regard. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The QFIs may invest in rupee denominated units of equity schemes of domestic MFs issued by the SEBI registered domestic MFs under the two routes, namely: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Direct Route – SEBI registered Depository Participant (DP) route </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Indirect Route - Unit Confirmation Receipt (UCR) route </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ These investments would be subject to specified terms and conditions as highlighted below: </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">General conditions </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Investments by the QFIs would be subject to a ceiling of USD 10 billion under both the routes. For the purpose of this ceiling of USD 10 billion, total amount invested for the purchase of domestic MFs units by all QFIs and the money lying in the single rupee pool bank accounts of DPs would be added. SEBI will monitor the ceiling of USD 10 billion on daily basis through the concerned domestic MFs and DPs. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Direct Route </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The DP route will be operated through separate single rupee pool bank account to be maintained by the DP with a AD Category I Bank in India. The funds received from the QFIs into this account shall be remitted to the domestic MF either on the same day of the receipt of the funds from QFIs or by next business day in case money is received after business hours, failing which the funds would be immediately repatriated back to the QFI's overseas bank account. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Indirect Route </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Domestic MFs would be allowed to open foreign currency accounts outside India for the limited purpose of receiving subscriptions from the QFIs as well as for redeeming the UCRs. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2011/rbi11cir008.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A.P. (DIR Series) CIRCULAR NO. 08/RBI, Dated: August 9, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dr. Subbarao re-appointed RBI Governor for two more years </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Government of India approved the extension of the term of Dr. D. Subbarao as the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India. Dr. Subbarao's term has been extended for a period of two years with effect from September 5, 2011 up to September 4, 2013. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dr. Subbarao was appointed the Governor of the Reserve Bank in September 2008 for a period of three years. Dr. Subbarao took over as the 22nd Governor of the Reserve Bank on September 5, 2008. His term was up to September 4, 2011. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Commenting upon his re-appointment, Dr. Subbarao said, “I am happy that the Government has reposed its confidence in me at this difficult juncture in the world economy. I look forward to working with a great team in the Reserve Bank to meet the many challenges ahead.” </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why Customs (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2011?</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Statement of objects and Reasons for the Bill states,</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"The Customs Act, 1962 consolidates and amends the law relating to customs. Clause (34) of section 2 of the said Act defines the expression “proper officer” in relation to the functions under the said Act to mean the officer of customs who is assigned those functions by the Central Board of Excise and Customs or the Commissioner of Customs. Recently, a question has arisen as to whether the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) is competent to exercise and discharge the powers of a proper officer for issue of a notice for the demand of duty. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of<em> India in Commissioner of Customs versus Sayed Ali and Anr. (Civil Appeal Nos. 4294-4295 of 2002) </em></font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=26&filename=legal/sc/2011/2011-TIOL-20-SC-CUS.htm" target="_blank">2011-TIOL-20-SC-CUS</a></strong></em></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> held
that only a customs officer who has been specifically assigned the duties
of assessment and re-assessment in the jurisdiction area is competent to
issue a notice for the demand of duty as a proper officer. As such the Commissioner
of Customs (Preventive) who has not been assigned the function of a “proper officer” for
the purposes of assessment or re-assessment of duty and issue of show cause
Notice to demand Customs duty under Section 17 read with Section 28 of the
Act in respect of goods entered for home consumption is not competent to
function as a proper officer which has not been the legislative intent." </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In view of the above the Show Cause Notices issued over the time by the Customs officers such as those of the Commissionerates of Customs (Preventive), Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence and others, who were not specifically assigned the functions of assessment and re-assessment of customs duty may be construed as invalid. The result would be huge loss of revenue to the exchequer and disruption in the revenue already mobilized in cases already adjudicated. However, having regard to the urgency of the matter, the Government issued notification on 6th July, 2011 specifically declaring certain officers as proper officers for the aforesaid purposes." </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the circumstances, it has become necessary to clarify the true legislative intent that Show Cause Notices issued by Customs officers, i.e., officers of the Commissionerates of Customs (Preventive), Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI) and Central Excise Commissionerates for demanding customs duty not levied or short levied or erroneously refunded in respect of goods imported are valid, irrespective of the fact that any specific assignment as proper officer was issued or not. It is, therefore, purposed to amend the Customs Act, 1962 retrospectively and to validate anything done or any action taken under the said Act in pursuance of the provisions of the said Act at all material times irrespective of issuance of any specific assignment on 6th July," </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><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">Captive consumption - Assessable value to be arrived at by adding notional profit of 10% and not by adding profit percentage of final products as reflected in previous year: CESTAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THIS</strong> issue has been settled by the Bangalore Bench of this Tribunal in the appellant's own case for the previous period, wherein it was held that notional profit of 10% is good enough. Therefore, following the decision of coordinate Bench, in this case also, held hat the appellants had correctly valued their captively consumed goods. </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 two partners of JV execute works awarded by State Govt, assessee is even then not entitled to avail benefits of Sec 80IA(4) as contract was awarded to JV, an independent legal entity - NO, assessee is eligible: ITAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> question before the Bench is - Whether when, for all practical purposes, the two partners of a JV execute the infrastructural work awarded by the State Government, even then the assessee, one of the partners, is not entitled to avail the benefits of Sec 80IA(4) as the contract was awarded to the JV, an independent legal entity. And the verdict goes in favour of assessee. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><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">POY from an SEZ seized from Steel factory - Documents produced only after Show Cause Notice - Confiscation, penalty and duty confirmed: </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> stage at which the documents regarding the goods were produced by the appellant, their genuineness could not be verified. There is no explanation from the appellant as to why during the more than 6 months from the date of seizure to the date of show cause notice they could not produce the documents covering the goods. In view of this, the explanation of the appellant that the goods under seizure had been legally purchased by M/s Sonal Garments from the SEZ and they have purchased the goods from M/s Sonal Garments is difficult to accept. </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 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>