Jurisprudentiol – Tuesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

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

THE 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.

Income Tax

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

THE 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.

Central Excise

Central Excise - Waiver of pre-deposit - No interference against order of Commissioner (Appeals) ordering pre-deposit: HC

THE 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.

See our columns Tuesday for the judgements