TIOL-DDT 1694 · 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 1694 </font><br> </strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>16.09.2011 <br> </strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Friday </strong></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Central Excise - Electronic Returns Mandatory For All Assessees </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FROM</strong> 1st October all Central Excise assessees, [except those availing the exemption under Notification Nos. 49/2003-CE and 50/2003-Central Excise, both dated 10th June 2003 (Uttarakhand and Himachal exemptions)] are to file monthly returns electronically. This applies to hundred percent EOUs also. Rule 12 and Rule 17 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 are amended. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2011/exnt11_21.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 21/2011-CX. (NT), Dated: September 14, 2011 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CENVAT Declaration and Return to be Filed Electronically </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AS </strong>per Rule 9A(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, a manufacturer of final products is required to furnish an annual declaration of principal inputs and the input-final product ratio, in respect of each of the final products manufactured or to be manufactured. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per Rule 9A(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, a manufacturer of final products is required to submit a monthly return, in respect of receipt and consumption of each principal inputs with reference to quantity of final products manufactured by him. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now this declaration and return are to be submitted electronically. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2011/exnt11_22.htm"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 22/2011-CX. (NT), Dated: September 14, 2011 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Tariff Value Increased for Brass Scrap and Confused for Poppy seeds </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has increased the tariff values of Brass Scrap (all grades) from USD 4355 to USD 4392. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Notification states that the Tariff value of poppy seeds is changed from USD <strong>2281 </strong> to USD to <strong>2281</strong>. There is no change in the value of other items. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now as per the Notification, there is no change in the Tariff Value of Poppy seeds. It was USD 2281 by Notification No. 63/2011 dated 30-08-2011 and it is changed to USD 2281 by the latest notification. Is it a mistake or is a corrigendum on the way? This is the way that notifications are manufactured by the Board and they impose all kinds of restrictions on those who manufacture goods. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2011/cnt11_065.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 65/2011-CUS (N.T.), Dated : September 15, 2011 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>MC Joshi appointed Regular Chairman of CBDT </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/joshimc.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="80" height="88" hspace="5" border="0" align="left"></font>YESTERDAY</strong>, DDT reported about the appointment of a regular Chairman for CBEC. Today we are happy to report that CBDT also gets a regular Chairman. The present acting Chairman, MC Joshi is appointed regular Chairman. Joshi took over as acting Chairman of the Board on 1 st August 2011. Mukesh Chand Joshi, like his CBEC counterpart is a 1974 IRS officer but has three months more service left than the CBEC Chairman. Joshi is to retire on 31 st January 2012 and is also likely to get an extension. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=70&filename=pitara/sernews/order/cbdtorder263_2011.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DOR F.No A.12026/14/2010-Ad.I Office Order No. 263/2011, Dated : September 15, 2011 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Kingfisher Defaults on Payment of Service Tax, TDS </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>SIT</strong> back and enjoy the Kingfisher experience - they have not been paying their taxes regularly. The Auditor's report to the Balance Sheet of Kingfisher Airlines for the year 2010-11 states, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“<em>Undisputed statutory dues in respect of service tax, withholding taxes, provident fund, fringe benefit tax, investor education and protection fund and employees' state insurance dues have not been regularly deposited with the appropriate authorities</em>”. </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Service Tax dues amount to Rs. 1047.76 Lakhs and TDS Rs. 42,297 Lakhs. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DEPB – New Scheme to be Announced Today? </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>TODAY</strong> at 12 Noon, Finance Secretary RS Gujral and CBEC Chairman Dutt Majumder will address a joint press conference, on the issue of DEPB at the Committee Room 72 in North Block. The new scheme is likely to unfold. Watch our columns. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Savings Bank account maintained by residents in India - Joint holder - liberalisation </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Committee to Review the Facilities for Individuals under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 has recommended in its Report that resident individuals may be permitted to include non-resident close relative(s) (relatives as defined in the Companies Act, 1956) as joint account holder(s) in their resident bank accounts. Accordingly RBI has decided that individuals resident in India may be permitted to include non-resident close relative(s) (relatives as defined in Section 6 of the Companies Act, 1956) as a joint holder(s) in their resident bank accounts on ‘former or survivor' basis. However, such non- resident Indian close relatives shall not be eligible to operate the account during the life time of the resident account holder. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Similar liberalization is announced in other accounts </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2011/rbi11cir012.htm" target="_blank">RBI Circular No. 12</a>, <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2011/rbi11cir013.htm" target="_blank">13</a>, <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2011/rbi11cir015.htm" target="_blank">15/RBI., Dated: September 15, 2011 </a></strong></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Foreign Investments in India - Transfer of security by way of gift </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A</strong> person resident in India who proposes to transfer, by way of gift, to a person resident outside India any security including shares/convertible debentures is required to obtain prior approval of the Reserve Bank. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">However, the value of security to be transferred together with any security transferred by the transferor, as gift, to any person residing outside India which was not to exceed the rupee equivalent of USD 25,000 during a calendar year has been enhanced to USD 50,000 per financial year. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2011/rbi11cir014.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>RBI Circular No. 14/RBI., Dated: September 15, 2011 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Credit of sale proceeds of Foreign Direct Investments in India to NRE/FCNR (B) accounts - Clarification </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>HITHERTO</strong>, in terms of Schedule 3, 4 and 5 of the FEMA Notification No. 20/2000-RB dated May 3, 2000, sale proceeds of Foreign Investments in India were treated as eligible credit to NRE/FCNR (B) accounts, where the purchase consideration was paid by the Non-resident Indians / Persons of Indian Origin out of inward remittance or funds held in their NRE/FCNR (B) accounts and subject to applicable taxes, if any. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is now clarified that the same facility would be available to NRIs/ PIOs under Regulation 11 of the said Notification. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2011/rbi11cir016.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>RBI Circular No. 16/RBI., Dated: September 15, 2011 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><strong><font color="#006600">Jurispruden</font><font color="#FF6633" size="4">tiol</font><font color="#006600"> – Monday's cases</font></strong></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Show Cause Notice not issued by proper officer - Tribunal does not follow Supreme Court order - CESTAT is duty bound to follow binding precedent. Tribunal's approach not consistent with principles of judicial functioning: HC</strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> CESTAT as a judicial body must realize the importance of the doctrine of precedent in our legal system. Deference to judgments of the Supreme Court is a matter of constitutional principle. Equally, unless coordinate Benches of the Tribunal have due deference and regard for decisions rendered by the Tribunal, the elements of certainty and consistency in the judicial process which lie at the heart of judicial functioning would be seriously disrupted. Benches of a Tribunal must conform to the discipline that the doctrine of precedent exacts. The respect which independent adjudicators in our country command has been assiduously built up over small incremental steps. Consistency and certainty is an important element in the judicial process. They are foundations of the rule of law. These are not just elements of judicial tradition but form part of constitutional principle. They are as binding as a binding precedent. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">Income Tax </font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Whether remuneration paid to trustees can be construed as annual charge on property within meaning of Sec 24(1)(iv) - NO: Calcutta HC</strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BY</strong> a Will executed on July 26, 1921 one Sri Kali Das Paul, since deceased, created a Trust dedicating the properties mentioned in Schedule-'Ga' of the said Will in favour of Sree Sree Iswar Radhakishan Jew which is a regular assessee under the Act. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">THE issues before the Bench are - Whether remuneration paid to trustees can be construed as 'annual charge' on the property within the meaning of Sec 24(1)(iv) - Whether such expenditure is deductible from the income of the Trust. NO is the HC's answer. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">Service Tax </font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Since service is partly performed in India and partly outside India, service to be regarded as export - Fit case for full waiver of pre-deposit: CESTAT </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>appellant conducts a comparison of the technical data with the standards already made available by the US Company and submits a report to its parent company. The parent company in US thereafter interacts with its clients and advises further rectifications to their products. The clients in India make payments for these services to the US Company which in turn remunerates its Indian subsidiary viz., the appellant for their work. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Central Excise </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Rule 10A of Valuation Rules, 2000 - fabricating bodies on duty paid chassis - whether applicants are liable to pay duty on price at which vehicles are sold by Tata Motors - Pre-deposit ordered of Rs.50 lakhs: CESTAT </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> applicant's own case the Tribunal vide Stay order dated 05.08.2008 accepted the offer made by the applicant and directed the applicant to deposit an amount of Rs.25 lakhs. After going through the argument of both the sides and particularly in view of the submissions made in the grounds of appeal, prima facie it is not a fit case for total waiver of duty. The applicants are directed to deposit an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See our columns Monday for the judgements </strong></font></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 align="justify"><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>