Jurisprudentiol – Thursday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Building of bus bodies on duty paid chassis amounts to manufacture of motor vehicle – appellant is, therefore, entitled to file refund claim of un-utilized Cenvat Credit - CESTAT

IN terms of Ch. Note 5 to chapter 87, building of bus bodies on duty paid chassis amounts to manufacture of motor vehicle. Where the manufacturer is unable to utilize the credit accumulated in respect of the inputs used in the manufacture of excisable goods, which were exported, the manufacturer is entitled for refund subject to the conditions prescribed therein. It cannot be said that the appellants are not eligible to file refund claim.

Income Tax

Whether Sec 275 disentitles AO from availing limitation period of six months from end of month in which Tribunal order is received by AO so as to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - NO, rules High Court

THE Assessee, a Company, operates in the business of shares and securities. The AO noticed that the Assessee had claimed exemption of an expenditure of Rs.4,15,86,591/- being interest on loans raised for acquiring shares of various companies. The issue before the High Court is - Whether Sec 275 disentitles AO from availing limitation period of six months from end of month in which Tribunal order is received by AO so as to levy penalty u/s 271(1)(c). NO is the High Court's answer.

Customs

The date on which 'Let Export Order' is given is relevant date for determining rate of export duty - since export duty is Nil on 13.06.2008, exporter is not liable for payment of any export duty: CESTAT

AS regards the applicability of Notification 77/08, which is dated 13.06.2008, there is no doubt or dispute about the fact that Notification takes effect from the midnight of 12th and 13th June 2008. In the instant case, the ‘Let Export Order' has been given on 13.06.2008 and therefore the benefit of notification 77/08 dated 13.06.2008 shall apply to the exports made by the appellant and hence they are rightly entitled for the refund of exports duties wrongly paid by them

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements