TIOL-DDT 1768 · 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 align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1768 </font><font size="3"></font><font size="2"><br> </font></strong><font size="2"><strong>05.01.2012 <br> Thursday </strong></font></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Khandsari Sugar Exempted from Excise Duty </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> first Notification in 2012 from the CBEC (Government) has exempted Khandsari Sugar from excise duty. What is the provocation, just about three months before the Budget? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">With effect from 01.01.2012, the new version of the Central Excise and Customs Tariffs has come into force, in tune with WCO's Harmonized System Nomenclature (HSN). It seems over two hundred countries are following the HSN. India was ready more than 9 months ago. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the old Central Excise Tariff, Khandsari Sugar was classified under tariff item '1701 1120' with a nil rate of duty. In the amended tariff, with effect from 01.01.2012, Khandsari Sugar got into item number '1701 1320' and '1701 1420' with a 5 percent duty. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Apparently, the Government never intended to levy excise duty on Khandsari sugar and so has now exempted it unconditionally under a new entry 11A in the table to Notification No. 3/2006 dated 01.03.2006. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Presenting the 1984, Union Budget, the Finance Minister said, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"<em>I propose to fully exempt khandsari sugar from the levy of excise duty. I am taking this measure in view of the labour-intensive character of this industry, and to provide further opportunity for growth of employment in this Industry. The abolition of excise duty will also help this industry to pay better price to cane growers, and will give relief to a large number of khandsari units located in far-flung rural areas. The revenue sacrifice involved in this proposal is Rs.16.42 crores. Khandsari, I am told, is also better for health. If as a result of this measure, the health of the nation improves, I hope the credit will flow to me and not to my distinguished colleague, the Health Minister! </em>" </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Any guess as to who was that Finance Minister 28 years ago? Our own Pranab Da! </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Similarly, <em>Furniture, bases and covers for sewing machines and parts thereof; other parts of sewing machines </em>falling under the new heading 845290 are exempted by new entry Sl. No. 14B in Notification No. 6/2006 dated 01.03.2006. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Though we hate to find fault with the very first notification of the year, we are afraid, we have to say that this notification will generate unnecessary litigation and paperwork. This notification is dated 03.01.2012, but the amended entries in the tariff came into force on 01.01.2012. So, this exemption was not available for two days. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, overactive Central Excise officers can go to Khandsari factories and demand duty for two days, attach properties, issue notices, advise the assesses to go to the Board for a Section 11C Notification …. For the next five years, litigation can go on before Board finally issues that Section 11C Notification. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why did they not issue this notification on or before 01.01.2012? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let us hope the Board comes up with a clarification, corrigendum, correction or amendment to the effect that the notification is effective 01.01.2012. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2012/etariff12_01.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 1/2012-CX., Dated: January 03, 2012 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Can CBI prosecute a High Court Judge? </font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A</strong> little background: <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=7817" target="_blank">DDT 944 - 04.09.2008 </a></strong>, reported, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>On 13 th August, Additional Advocate General Sandeep Bansal, through his munshi Prakash Chand delivered a packet containing Rs 15 lakhs in cash to the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, a Punjab and Haryana High Court judge. She called the police. Bansal was arrested by the police. He resigned from the position of AG immediately and apparently told the police that the money was wrongly delivered to Justice Kaur's residence and that it was actually meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav. He claimed that he had sent his munshi with the currency notes because the money was needed for a land deal made by the judge in Solan in Himachal Pradesh. </em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>It seems another sum of Rs. 15 lakhs was delivered at Justice Yadav's home the next day by Bansal's friend and property dealer Rajiv Gupta. </em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Justice Nirmal Yadav was a Judicial Member of the ITAT and was posted in Mumbai for about 2 years before her elevation on 05.11.2004. </em></font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The CBI took charge of the case, but in 2009 filed a closure report. Closure report was examined by the Special Judge (CBI Court), Chandigarh. On examination, the Special Judge refused to accept the closure report vide his order dated 26.3.2010 and directed the CBI to conduct further investigation. CBI carried out further investigation in due deference to the order of the Special Judge and approached the competent authority for grant of sanction for prosecution. The competent authority i.e. the President of India vide order dated 1.3.2011 granted sanction for prosecution of Justice (?) Nirmal yadav under Section 19 of PC Act for commission of offence punishable under Section 11 of the PC Act and other offences. As a consequence of the sanction for prosecution, a charge-sheet under Section 120-B of the IPC, Sections 11 and 12 of PC Act read with Sections 192, 193, 196, 199 and 200 of the IPC has been presented in the court of Special Judge (CBI Court), Chandigarh. The Special Judge took cognizance of the charge sheet by passing order dated 18.4.2011 and summoned the accused (former High Court Judge). </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Madam Nirmala Yadav challenged the sanction order, charge sheet and the proceedings initiated against her, including the order of taking cognizance by the Special Judge, before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. In this case, <em>Mrs </em>(note, it is Mrs and not Justice) <em> Nirmala Yadav versus Central Bureau of Investigation </em>, the High Court had one of its former judges as a petitioner before it and who was an accused in a criminal case in the CBI Court. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In a landmark judgement, the High Court dismissed her petition and observed,<font color="#FF6633"> </font><font color="#FF6633">"<em>Merely because the petitioner has enjoyed one of the highest constitutional offices, she cannot claim any special right or privilege as an accused than prescribed under law. Rule of law has to prevail and must prevail equally and uniformly, irrespective of the status of an individual. Taking a panoptic view of all the factual and legal issues, I find no valid ground for judicial intervention in exercise of inherent jurisdiction vested with this Court </em>".</font> </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the former High Court Judge has to face trial before the CBI Court as Accused No.1. </font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Absconding IAS Officer - Returned - Retired </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> DDT, <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=8085" target="_blank"> <strong>982 - 31.10.2008</strong></a>, we reported, </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"<em>An IAS officer, who had gone missing in the year 2000, has surfaced last week and a generous government has given him a posting. As per the Personnel Ministry's website, this officer was on leave from 1.8.2000 - How many years leave are these officers entitled to? </em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>It seems the officer just left Government in 2000 and had taken up a job in the US and now in October 2008, things are not exactly rosy in Bushland and things are much brighter for the Indian Bureaucrat and so our IAS officer is back in service. <strong>Now he can safely retire from Government service after a couple of years and earn a huge pension from the government month after month! </strong></em>" </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We are happy to report that this officer has retired on 31 December 2011, with all the irksome files about his absence closed. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Bureaucracy is all about Network! </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"> -Friday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></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>Discretion in passing interim orders is not an arbitrary discretion - Whim and caprice are alien to judicial process: High Court</strong></font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>High Court order started with the following guiding principles which should be kept on the desk of every adjudicating authority and are worth memorising every day before the start of work </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633"> Whether when Revenue searches several persons, a combined satisfaction recorded can be said to be legally valid for initiating action under Sec 158BD - YES, rules ITAT </font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <strong>THE </strong>issues before the Bench are - Whether ground relating to assumption of jurisdiction under section 158BD can, for the first time, be taken in the second round of litigation; whether completion of assessment proceedings in the case of searched person is sine qua non for initiating action under section 158BD; Whether for judging the correct date of notice of 158BD typographical errors should be ignored; Whether combined satisfaction, when the searched persons are more than one, can be recorded for initiating action under section 158BD and Whether undisclosed income unearthed during search can only be added under chapter- XIV-B. And the verdict partly goes in favour the assessee. </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 size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633">Manufacture of base cream of toothpaste - Since on the quantity of base cream used for R&D the applicant pays duty, the remaining quantity not used is also to be considered as marketable and not a waste - Pre-deposit ordered: CESTAT </font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> applicant manufactures base cream of toothpaste for Research & Development purpose. On that quantity which is used in research and development purpose, the applicant pays Central Excise duty. However, the remaining quantity is cleared as waste without payment of any duty on the plea that the same is not marketable. </font></p> <p><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more DDT </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Day. </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>