Jurisprudentiol – Thursday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Central Excise

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

THIS 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.

Income Tax

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

THE 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.

Customs

POY from an SEZ seized from Steel factory - Documents produced only after Show Cause Notice - Confiscation, penalty and duty confirmed:

THE 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.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements