TIOL-DDT 1676 · 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 1676</font><br>
19.08.2011 <br>
Friday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Appeal to CESTAT and Higher Courts -CBEC enhances Monetary limits by Five Times </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BY</strong> instructions in <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2011/cxinstruct03.htm" target="_blank">F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC: dated October 20, 2010</a></strong>, the CBEC had fixed monetary limits of Rs. 1 lakh and Rs. 2 Lakhs, for appeals to CESTAT and High Court respectively. <strong><a href="http://taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=11572" target="_blank">DDT 1472 (22.10.2010)</a></strong>, had commented, “<strong><font color="#FF6633">But isn't the threshold limits too low</font></strong>? They should be at least Rs 5 lakhs and Rs. 10 Lakhs respectively”. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT</strong> is proud, happy and grateful to the Board for accepting this suggestion. The monetary limits have been enhanced.</font></p>
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr bordercolor="#85A941" bgcolor="#85A941">
<td width="46" valign="top" bgcolor="#85A941"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sl.No. </font></strong></p></td>
<td width="115" valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Appellate Forum </font></strong></p></td>
<td width="99" valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Monetary limit </font></strong></p></td>
<td width="156" valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Previous limits as per Instructions dated 20.10.2010 </font></strong></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. </font></strong></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CESTAT </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs.5,00,000/- </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p align="right"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 1,00,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. </font></strong></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">HIGH COURTS </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs.10,00,000/- </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p align="right"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 2,00,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. </font></strong></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">SUPREME COURT </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs.25,00,000/- </font></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p align="right"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 5,00,000 </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board has further clarified that:-</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ In a case where a part of the duty demanded is not disputed and is paid and the outstanding duty under dispute is less than the monetary limit prescribed by the Board, no appeal shall be filed. In other words, monetary limit shall apply on the disputed duty and not on the total duty demanded in a case. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The monetary limits being prescribed by the Board would apply to cases of refund as well. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The limit specified herein will not be applicable to application filed before the Joint Secretary (Revision Application). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ In all cases of audit objections accepted by the Department, while protective demands may continue to be issued but the same would be subjected to the monetary limits for filing appeal in the Tribunal, High Courts and the Supreme Court. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The revised monetary limits will come into force with effect from 01.09.2011. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board deserves all praise for this magnanimous and assessee-friendly decision. This will, to a large extent, reduce frivolous appeals and the higher courts can concentrate better on really important issues. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2011/cxinstruct03.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Instruction in F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC., Dated: August 17, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty on Sodium Nitrite re-imposed - Dead notifications flogged to life twice </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> anti
dumping duty on Sodium Nitrite originating in, or exported from, People's
Republic of China, imposed by Notification No. 143/2009-Cus, dated 22nd December
2009, lapsed on 17th January 2011 and was resurrected again by Notification
No. 11/2011-Cus dated 17.02.2011 giving a fresh lease of life to the anti-dumping
duty till June 30, 2011<strong> (please refer to <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=12115" target="_blank">TIOL-DDT
1554 dated 22.02.2011</a>)</strong>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the Government has reimposed the duty at a reduced rate with effect from 17th August 2011, valid for five years. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Was there no dumping and injury during the period between 30th June and 16th August, 2011? </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2011/ctariff11_076.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 76/2011-Cus., Dated: August 17, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Exemption to Coal – Redrafted </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>S.No. </strong>66A of the table to Notification No. 21/2002 dated 01/03.2002 reads as, </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Coal having Swelling Index or Crucible Swelling Number of 1 and above and mean reflectance of above 0.60, for use in the manufacture of iron or steel using Corex, Finex or PCI technology . </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sl. No. 68, reads as, </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Coking coal </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Explanation: for the purpose of this exemption, “coking coal” means Coal having mean reflectance of more than 0.85 and Swelling Index or Crucible Swelling Number of more than 2. </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, S. No. 66A is omitted and the explanation in S. No. 68 is changed to read as: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Explanation: for the purpose of this exemption, “coking coal” means Coal having mean reflectance of more than <font color="#FF6633"><strong>0.60 and Swelling Index or Crucible Swelling Number of more than 1</strong></font>. </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Prior to this amendment, goods listed at S. No. 66A were allowed for import subject to the importer following IGCRDMEG Rules, 1996. Now, S. Nos. 66A and 68 seem to have merged and goods listed at S. No. 68 can be imported without any conditions after this amendment. </font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board should explain the cause and effect of their notifications. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2011/ctariff11_077.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 77/2011-Cus., Dated: August 17, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">FTP - Export of Cotton - More than one RC </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has amended Notification No. 63(RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 4.8.2011 whereby an exporter can now obtain more than one Registration Certificate for export of cotton during current cotton year 2010-11 (up to 30th September 2011) </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Welcome Changes in CESTAT - Only for Delhi and Mumbai? </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>YESTERDAY</strong>, reporting on the above subject, <strong>DDT</strong> had commented, “<em>It is not clear whether short matters will be listed every day in Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Chennai and Kolkata.</em>” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Advocates and consultants in these Benches of the CESTAT are worried that, as per the Circular, Stay matters will be heard only on one day in a week in Benches other than Delhi and Mumbai. A senior advocate to wrote in, “<em>Contrary to the view expressed in DDT , this circular will benefit only Mumbai and Delhi litigants. It will adversely affect other Benches by reducing the number of days for stay hearing from 2 days a week to 1 day a week</em>”. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is learnt that the Indirect Practitioners Association of Bangalore CESTAT has sent a representation to the CESTAT Vice-President, to <em>extend the beneficial changes brought about in Mumbai and New Delhi to Bangalore also – that is, order that both stay matters and regular matters be listed on all days from Monday through Thursday. The Association submits that this would be in keeping with the objective of the Office Order to clear the heavy pendency and also in keeping with the principle of uniform practice throughout the country without any disparity between the Benches</em>. </font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let us hope the Vice-President will give a clarification soon. </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chairman's Desk - New CBDT Chairman's First Message </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> new CBDT Chairman is continuing the tradition of messages from the Chairman's Desk. The first message of the Chairman starts on a philosophical note quoting Bertrand Russell: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The observer, when he seems to himself to be observing a stone, is really, if physics is to be believed, observing the effects of the stone upon himself . </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Like any Revenue officer, his first priority is Revenue. He says, “Our Revenue Collection target for the present fiscal stands at over Rs. 5.32 lakh crores which has been increased by 10% by the Hon'ble FM. I would like to call upon every member of the Aayakar Parivar to take on the call of duty and put in <strong>their</strong> (sic) best efforts for the attainment of the revised target. I know it is difficult, however nothing is impossible and I am confident that the officers will rise to the occasion”. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">He adds, “<em>Staff welfare and Housing is a subject which is dear to my heart. I extol upon the administrative Commissioners to ensure that substantial welfare measures are put in to place in their respective charges and wherever required proposals be sent to the Board for immediate action. I would personally ensure that the Directorate of Income Tax (Infrastructure) takes up these matters without any delay</em>”.</font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Authority for facilitation and Power to trouble </font></strong></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NN</strong> Menon, Director of Trade Track, Cochin sent us this mail:- </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Legislature, Judiciary and Administration are the 3 constitutional pillars on which our dynamic and vibrant democracy rotates and revolves. The strength of these three pillars determines the vitality of the society. If there are any cracks in any of the pillars, it will adversely affect the well being of the nation at all levels. The Administration pillar is directly and manifestly related to Trade and Industry albeit the other two pillars do have indirect and vicarious impact on them. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the “Administrative” set up, again the attitude of the officers at the operating level, be it in direct taxes, indirect taxes, corporate affairs, Foreign Trade, etc. etc, play a vital role in rendering the life of the assessee, tax payer, importer or exporter as the case may be, happy or miserable. The officers at the operating levels are vested with the “Authority” to facilitate the Trade as also the “Power” to trouble the Trade. The culture of the officer determines as to whether he proposes to choose to exercise his “Authority” or “Power”. The wise and sober ones exercise the former but the “otherwise” and silly ones exercise the latter. Those who exercise their “Authority” “hold an office” but those who exercise their “Power”, “occupy a Chair”. The difference between them is the difference between a pleasant Deepavali cracker and a disastrous atom bomb. This indiscriminate exercise of using the atom bomb is the bane of our system. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The “Power” users, love to record, as evidence, the series of steps he has taken to initially deny the claim so that the “audit” will not fault him later for having granted the claim without the “application of mind” and consideration for revenue loss. This audit phobia is perhaps the root cause for many officers to choose the path of “Power” and shun the path of “Authority”. Result? Facilitation goes for a “six”!! Casualty? Trade. What then is the solution? This is an important matter that requires the urgent attention of important people. </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><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a></a><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"><strong>Customs</strong></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Confiscation of books attempted to be exported to Nigeria on ground that books bear a remark 'For sale in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka only' is without any authority of law: CESTAT</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> appellant filed a Shipping Bill dated 11.8.2008 for “Printed Books” destined to Nigeria, FOB value Rs.23.34 lakhs. The consignment was subjected to examination on the ground that some of the books bear a remark ‘For sale in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka only”. 2583 numbers of printed books, out of 7947 numbers of books, of declared FOB value of Rs.11,33,000/- were seized by the Customs authorities on the ground that they have violated Copyright Act, 1957. </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 agency agreement between assessee and non-resident continues even after expiry but no royalty is paid, compensation paid to assessee for formal termination of agreement is akin to loss of profit making apparatus, and thus, is capital receipt - NO, says ITAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>issue before the Tribunal is - Whether when the agency agreement between the assessee and the non-resident continues even after expiry but no royalty is paid during this period, compensation paid to the assessee after many years later for formal termination of the agreement is akin to loss of profit-making apparatus, and thus, is capital receipt. NO, rules the ITAT. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Excise</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Excise - Waiver of pre-deposit - No interference against order of Commissioner (Appeals) ordering pre-deposit: HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> order impugned in the writ petition does not call for interference both on merits and the legal grounds urged in the writ petition are not tenable in law. Apart from the said reasons, having regard to the categorical finding recorded in the order by the determining authority and the reasons recorded by the appellate authority are cogent reasons on the basis of which the records perused by the determining authority the same were required to be considered by the appellate authority. Therefore, the appellate authority has rightly rejected the stay application seeking for waiver of pre-deposit amount imposed upon the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition fails being devoid of merit. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Tuesday for the judgements</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tuesday with more<strong> DDT </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Weekend. </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>