Jurisprudentiol – Wednesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

If Bills of Entry were indicated as finally assessed and there being no change in rate of duty as well as amount of duty, there cannot be any presumption that Bills of Entry were provisionally assessed and remained to be provisionally assessed - CESTAT

IMPORT of Cotton Seed Oil (Edible grade) by claiming benefit of duty exemption under Notification No. 20/99-Cus – Bills of Entry which were provisionally assessed were stamped as finally assessed on 25.05.2001 – In such a scenario, claim of Revenue that rate of duty and total amount was yet to be changed on the basis of test results, under the impression that late charge has already been given and confirmed, amounts to misreading provisions of Customs Act, 1962 – Assessment of Bill of Entry is an appealable decision under provisions of Customs Act, 1962 – If Bills of Entry were indicated as finally assessed and there being no change in rate of duty as well as amount of duty, there cannot be any presumption that Bills of Entry were provisionally assessed and remained to be provisionally assessed – No legal infirmity in order of Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside order of lower authority – Revenue appeal devoid of merits

Income Tax

Whether, to avail Sec 80IB(10) benefits, it is mandatory for developer to have ownership of project land - NO, rules HC

ASSESSEE claimed deduction u/s 80IB(10) on the income derived from the business of the undertaking developing and building housing project approved by the local authority. Assessee entered into a development agreement with the owners and the owners entered into an agreement to sell the land in question to the assessee. AO rejected the claim of the assessee stating that the assessee firm was not the owner of the land. Approval by the local authority as well as permission to develop the project and permission to commence construction were not in the name of the assessee firm. The assessee had merely acted as an agent or a contractor for construction of residential houses.

Service Tax

Since neither corporation nor individuals are professionally qualified engineers or an engineering firm, prima facie they would not be covered by definition of consulting engineers - Pre-deposit waived: CESTAT

ON perusal, it is clear that the appellant's main objective is to undertake construction activities for and on behalf of the serving employees of Government of M.P. in the Police Department. The appellant body consists of various working officers of the Police department, who are managing the affairs of the Corporation. They are not qualified engineers. As such, neither the corporation nor the individuals handling the said corporation are professionally qualified engineers or an engineering firm, in which case they would not be prima facie covered by the definition of consulting engineers.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements