TIOL-DDT 1684 · 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 1684 </font><br> </strong></font><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">02.09.2011 <br> </font></strong><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Friday </font></strong></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Safeguard Duty Imposed </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has imposed safeguard duty on imports of N1, 3-dimethyl butyl- N'phenylenediamine (PX-13 also known as 6 PPD), falling under tariff items 3812, 3810, 2921, 2925, 2934 and 2942 at the rate of thirty per cent ad valorem minus anti-dumping duty payable, if any , for one year and at twenty five per cent ad valorem, minus anti-dumping duty payable, if any , after that for another year. The duty is not applicable to imports from countries, notified as developing countries, other than China. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2011/ctariff11_083.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 83/2011-Cus., Dated: August 30, 2011 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Tariff Value Decreased for Brass Scrap and Increased for Poppy seeds </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has decreased the tariff values of Brass Scrap (all grades) from USD 4399 to USD 4355. Tariff value of poppy seeds is increased from 2242 USD to 2281. There is no change in the value of other items. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2011/cnt11_063.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 63/2011-CUS (N.T.), Dated: August 30, 2011 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export of Pan Masala-Gutkha packed in plastic sachet by 100% EOU – Board Clarifies </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BOARD</strong> has received references seeking clarification on the applicability of the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 to the export of pan masala / gutkha packed in plastic sachets by Export Oriented Units. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Some Chief Commissioners are of the view that the manufactures of pan masala /gutkha shall be required to give an undertaking to comply with the provisions of the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011; under no circumstance should export of the goods in question be stopped or disallowed. Other Chief Commissioners had a contrary view that allowing the export of pan masala / gutkha packed in plastic sachets would be a contravention of the said Rules of 2011. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board clarifies: </font></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Ministry of Environment and Forests notified the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 on 04.02.2011 and amended the same on 02.07.2011. Rule 3(b) earlier defined a carry bag to mean “all plastic bags used to carry commodities, including self carrying features”. After<strong> 02.07.2007</strong> this definition has been changed as “bags made from all plastic material, used for the purpose of carrying or dispensing commodities but do not include bags that constitute or form an integral part of the packaging in which goods are sealed prior to use”. On its part, Rule 3(k) earlier defined “multilayered packaging” and w.e.f. <strong>02.07.2007</strong> this was changed to apply to “multilayered plastic pouch or sachet” and corresponding changes have been made in Rule 3(m) and Rule 8.</font></em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> [</font><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>how can they change it on 2.7.2007 – four years before the Rules were notified?</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">] </font></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Carry bags and sachets are two distinct items. In addition, the exemption from the requirement of Rule 5 is available only to a manufacture of carry bags. Thus, a unit manufacturing pan masala / gutkha cannot claim this exemption. Therefore, export of said goods in plastic sachets / plastic material in any form would be in contravention of the provisions of Plastic Waste (Management and Handing) Rules, 2011. </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board wants, “Action in respect of all past cases may therefore be finalised in the light of the clarification. Suitable Public Notice / Standing Order may be issued for guidance of all concerned in respect of all cases relating to past, present and future”. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2011/cxinstruct05.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Instruction in F.No. 528/69/2011-STO (TU) ; Dated August 30, 2011 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Self-Assessment in Customs - Draft Bill of Entry and Shipping Bill Regulations Announced </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CONSEQUENT</strong> to the introduction of ‘self assessment' in Customs in the Finance Act, 2011, it has become necessary to change the regulations and the forms. Accordingly Board has prepared draft 'Bill of Entry (Electronic Declaration) Regulations, 2011' and draft ' Shipping Bill (Electronic Declaration) Regulations, 2011. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board solicits comments and suggestions on the draft Regulations from the trade and industry associations, departmental officers and others, which may be sent to Director (Customs), Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise & Customs, Room No.227-B, North Block, New Delhi – 110001 or at Fax No. (011) 23092173 or at e-mail I.D.: <a href="mailto:dircus@nic.in"><strong>dircus@nic.in</strong> </a></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Draft regulations have been put up only to elicit public response. Final decision shall be taken only after due examination of the responses received. They want the feedback latest by 16th September 2011. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/draftbill_shipping_electronic.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC F. No. 450/26/2011-Cus.IV., Dated: September 01, 2011 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBDT Instructions on Monetary Limits for Appeals - Ipso facto should not be Applied</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=67&filename=notification/cbdt/2011/instruct1103.htm" target="_blank">Instruction No. 3/2011 dated 09.02.2011</a>, CBDT has fixed monetary limits for filing appeals in the Tribunal, High Courts and Supreme Court. Now the Supreme Court has opined that the Circular should not be applied ipso facto , particularly, when the matter has a cascading effect. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Recently the Supreme Court observed, “<em>Liberty is given to the Department to move the High Court pointing out that the <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=67&filename=notification/cbdt/2011/instruct1103.htm" target="_blank">Circular dated 9th February, 2011</a>, should not be applied ipso facto, particularly, when the matter has a cascading effect. There are cases under the Income - Tax Act, 1961, in which a common principle may be involved in subsequent group of matters or large number of matters. In our view, in such cases if attention of the High Court is drawn, the High Court will not apply the Circular ipso facto. For that purpose, liberty is granted to the Department to move the High Court in two weeks.</em>” </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This would be applicable to Indirect Taxes also. Now, can the Tribunals also admit appeals on the same ground? </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Please see </font><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=37&filename=legal/sc/2011/2011-TIOL-88-SC-IT.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2">2011-TIOL-88-SC-IT </font></a></font></strong></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dutiable and Exempted Products - Rs 1.50 CENVAT Credit taken - Demand of over Rs 30 Lakhs </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AN</strong> assessee who was manufacturing dutiable and allegedly exempted goods, took a credit of approximately one rupee and fifty paise of <em>irregular credit.</em> The Department issued a notice demanding more than thirty lakhs of rupees as 8 percent of the value of the exempted goods. The Tribunal noted that <strong><em>Justifiably, this action of the original authority amused the first appellate authority.</em></strong> The Tribunal also observed that <em>the cause of action for the appellant would also raise the eyebrows of any prudent person</em>.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Department's appeal was dismissed on the ground that there was no proper authorization.</font></p> <p><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Please see <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=13103" target="_blank">Breaking News</a>.</font></strong></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"> – Monday's cases </font></strong></font></strong></font></p> <p><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><font color="#663399"><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">Customs</font></font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export restrictions - Relevant date - In case of factory stuffing, presentation of goods before central excise officers for examination is relevant: HC </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">PROHIBITION</font></strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> on export of Casein vide Notification No 23 (RE-2010)/2009-2014 dated 18.02.2010 – The petitioner exercising the option of factory stuffing in terms of CBEC Circular No 60/2001-Cus dated 01.11.2001, submitted the consignments for examination by the jurisdictional central excise officers before imposing the restrictions - In terms of para 9.12 of Handbook procedures 2009-14, in case of change of policy provisions, the same shall not be applicable to the consignment already handed over to Customs for examination and subsequent exports up to Public Notice/Notification – Respondents are directed to allow the exports. </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interest Tax </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whether, if assessee fails to claim refund in income tax return itself, it is not entitled to such benefits - NO, it is entitled, rules HC</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>issues before the Bench are - Whether the assessee is not entitled to refund of taxes when the same is not claimed in the income tax return form itself; Whether only the income tax return Form and the not the annexures attached are relevant to decide the entitlement issue; and Whether the writ petition is maintainable to decide on the issue as to whether or not an asset is exigible to wealth tax under the provisions of Wealth Tax Act, 1957. </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">New argumentative novelty or submissions sparkling with creative ingenuity presented with high-pressure advocacy cannot undo or compel reconsideration of orders, if not challenged: CESTAT </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IT</strong> is no one's case that the department has challenged the said order at any stage. In case of any grievance against the said order, nothing prevented the department to approach the higher fora. It is pertinent that new argumentative novelty or submissions sparkling with creative ingenuity presented with high pressure advocacy cannot undo or compel reconsideration of the orders, if not challenged. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the case to the lower adjudicating authority unmindful to the fact that the power of remand of Commissioner (Appeals) has been taken away by the amendment of Section 35A of Central Excise Act, 1944 and Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the case of MIL India Ltd. </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Goods cleared under exemption notification No 6/2000 CE by following chapter X procedure – Provisions of Rule 57 CC are applicable: HC</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> appellant is engaged in manufacture of unmachined castings which are cleared on payment of duty. Some of the goods manufactured were cleared without payment of duty on the strength of CT 2 certificates issued by the purchaser. The purchaser company is authorized to obtain unmachined casting falling under Chapter No.73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act at nil rate of duty under Notification No.6/2000 CE for the manufacture of power driven pumps set primarily designed for handling water. </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Monday for the judgements </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday 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>