TIOL-DDT 1681 · 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">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Times;
mso-fareast-font-family:"-ÿ3ÿ f g";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
li.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Times;
mso-fareast-font-family:"-ÿ3ÿ f g";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
p.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Times;
mso-fareast-font-family:"-ÿ3ÿ f g";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
span.GramE {mso-style-name:"";
mso-gram-e:yes;}
span.SpellE {mso-style-name:"";
mso-spl-e:yes;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1681 </font><br>
29.08.2011 <br>
Monday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service Tax - Returns to be filed Electronically </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has amended the Service Tax Rules. The Proviso to Rule 7(2) is deleted. This proviso read as, "Provided that where an assessee has paid a total service tax of rupees ten lakhs or more including the amount paid by utilisation of CENVAT credit, in the preceding financial year, he shall file the return electronically".</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A new sub rule (3) is inserted, which reads as, "<em>(3) Every assessee shall submit the half-yearly return electronically". </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, now all the assessees are required to file the returns electronically. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Filing of electronic returns is easier said than done. Even big corporates with super-qualified work force and IT support, find it difficult and time consuming. What will happen to the small and tiny assessees? </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=40&filename=notification/servicetax/2011/stnot11_043.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 43/2011 - ST., Dated: August 25, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty on PVC Flex Films - Retrospective? </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Anti Dumping Duty on PVC Flex Films originating in, or exported from, People's Republic of China, was imposed provisionally by Notification No. 79/2010 – Cus, dated 30.07.2010. The Notification clearly mentioned that the anti dumping duty imposed under the notification shall be effective up to and inclusive of the 29th of January 2011. That is the duty is not valid from 30.01.2011. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the Government has imposed anti dumping duty on the product for a period of five years from the date of imposition of provisional duty, that is, the 30th July 2010. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Then what happens to the solemn declaration in Notification No. 79/2010 that the duty will be effective only up to 29th July 2011? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why should they write these dates in the notifications and then ignore them with impunity? Why can't they be a little more honest and say that the notification would be valid, until they say it is not valid? </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2011/ctariff11_082.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 82/2011-Cus., Dated: August 25, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Silghat in Assam Notified as Land Customs Station</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> CBEC has notified Silghat in the District of Nagaon, Assam as a Land Customs Station and Rahumari-Dhubri-Guwahati (Pandu)-Silghat section of the steamer route on the River Brahmaputra, as a route by which goods may pass by land or inland water into or out of India. Notification No. 63/1994 – Cus NT is amended. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2011/cnt11_061.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 61/2011-Cus NT., Dated: August 25, 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Court Fee - Centralised payment for appeals filed before SC - CBEC Instructions</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> present practice of payment of court fee by the department, as appellant or as respondent, in the appeals filed before the Supreme Court, is that the respective field formation/directorate deposits it in a decentralized manner through the Central Agency Section (Supreme Court). However, the decentralized process of payment of court fee results in avoidable delays and thus causing delays in filing of appeals or the counters, as the case may be. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC has decided that the process of payment of court fee in Supreme Court would be centralized and the Directorate of Legal Affairs has been entrusted with this work. In this regard, a separate fund has been sanctioned to Directorate of Legal Affairs for the financial year 2011-12 under the head "Law Charges". The Directorate of Legal Affairs has, after working out the modalities, informed that it is now in a position to start payment of court fee in a centralized manner. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In respect of appeals filed on or after 1.9.2011 in Supreme Court the court fee would be deposited by the Directorate of Legal Affairs, CBEC. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2011/cxinstruct04.htm"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC F. No. 275/05/2011-CX.8A, Dated: August 25 2011 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">IRS (Customs and Central Excise) Probationers meet President</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">152 Probationers of the Indian Revenue Service (Customs and Central Excise) of the 2009 Batch called on the President of India, Pratibha Devisingh Patil at Rashtrapati Bhavan on August 25, 2011. Speaking to the Probationers, the President emphasised on the qualities of honesty and service to the nation, that they should possess. </font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_1681_1.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="500" height="357" hspace="5" border="0" align="center"></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">She urged the officers to strive for providing an efficient and corruption free tax administration, which was the need of the hour. She also urged the probationers to be courteous to the taxpayers while at the same time being firm in dealing with the tax evaders. She said that through various reforms, both at the policy level as well as at the implementation level, an environment has to be created so that the taxpayers become compliant voluntarily. She emphasized the importance of Customs in protecting the economic frontiers of the country. She concluded with the hope that each of the probationers would emerge as an honest and efficient officer, which would be a matter of pride for the country, for his family and then for himself. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>It is wonderful that the Board thought of taking the probationers to the President. It should be a proud moment for each of the probationers that he/she had been to the Rashtrapati Bhavan and met the First Citizen. His/her next visit should be to receive an award from the President. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Probationers also had a meeting with Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee. </font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_1681_2.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="450" height="204" hspace="5" border="0" align="center"></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The FM exhorted the probationers to have right attitude towards their work, which is so vital to developmental works in the country. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">He also mentioned Management Guru Peter Drucker's story about three "stonecutters who were asked what they were doing. The first replied, "I am making a living."The second kept on hammering while he said, "I am doing the best job of stonecutting in the entire country."The third one looked up with a visionary gleam in his eyes and said, "I am building a cathedral". The FM said that work was the same but attitude differed. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">However, Drucker had a different theory. According to him, "The third man is, of course, the true manager. The first man knows what he wants to get out of the work and manages to do so. He is likely to give a "fair day's work for a fair day's pay". But he is not a manager and will never be one. It is the second man who is a problem. Workmanship is essential: in fact, an organization demoralizes if it does not demand of its members the highest workmanship they are capable of. But there is always a danger that the true workman, the true professional, will believe that he is accomplishing something when in effect he is just polishing stones or collecting footnotes. Workmanship must be encouraged in the business enterprise. But it must always be related to the needs of the whole."</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let us hope that these young IRS officers are not going to spend the rest of their lives polishing stones and believing that they are doing a great job! </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yet another HC upholds Service Tax on Renting; Levy and Retrospective Amendment not Unconstitutional </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>RENTING</strong> of any property ipso facto would not amount to service for the purpose of service charge. The Revenue also accepts this. However, in case of renting of immovable property, if service recipient uses it in the course of or furtherance of business or commerce, it can safely be stated that the service provider has rendered service, enabling the service recipient in value addition. Thus, if renting of immovable property is made in the course of or for furtherance of business or commerce, value addition is made by service provider in favour of service recipient. Such activity undertaken by the service provider for value addition in the course of or for furtherance of business or commerce, i.e. to carry on activity or business or commerce of the service recipient amounts to rendition of service and will fall within the meaning of definition of 'service tax'. Sec.65[105][zzzz] of Finance Act, 1994 as amended by Sec.75[5][h] and Sec.76 of the Finance Act, 2010 upheld. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So far, all the High Courts have upheld the levy as well as retrospective amendment. The Delhi High Court is yet to give its judgement, but in view of the judgements of several High Courts, can the Delhi High Court judgement be different? Now, the scene is sure to shift to the Supreme Court, but the preserving litigants will ultimately end up paying the tax with interest and maybe even penalty, while the lawyers will smile all the way to the banks. There is really no point in challenging a levy – the ultimate winner is the Government. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We will bring you this case tomorrow. </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"><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"><strong><font color="#663399">Central Excise </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">No Penalty in case of interpretational nature: SC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Commissioner, himself in his order-in-original has stated that the issue involved in the case is of interpretational nature. Keeping in mind the said factor, the Commissioner thought it fit not to impose harsh penalty and a penalty of an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs was imposed on the appellant while confirming the demand of the duty. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, penalty should not have been imposed upon the appellant. </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 compensation is paid for acquiring agricultural land, rigours of Sec 194LA are not attracted - Yes, rules ITAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Assessee is Special Land Acquisition Officer, Thane (SLAO). It paid 80% of the cost of the land to 29 persons as compensation for the land acquired from them without deducting any TDS. Observing this, the AO issued a show cause notice asking him to explain as to why he should not be treated as assessee in default under section 201(1) of the Act for the above default and the interest u/s 201(1A) should not be levied for the same. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> question before the Tribunal is - Whether when the compensation is paid for
acquiring the agricultural land, the rigours of Sec 194LA are not attracted
and whether, even if the land is not cultivated for long, it remains agricultural
in nature as long as it is not put to any other use. And the verdict goes
against the Revenue.</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font color="#FF6633" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2">Yet </font></strong><font size="2"><strong> another High Court upholds Service Tax on Renting; levy and retrospective amendment not unconstitutional: HC </strong></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> these writ petitions, as common question of law is involved and validity of Sub-clause [zzzz] of Clause[ 105] of Sec.65 of Finance Act, 1994 as amended by Sec.75 [5][h] and Sec.76 of the Finance Act, 2010 is under challenge, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. </font></p>
<p><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>