Jurisprudentiol – Wednesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

DEPB - whether aluminium grills can be termed as Extruded aluminium products, and if it is so, whether assessee can take benefit of Item 7 of Code 61:No, Rules SC

IT is an admitted position that assessee carries out the fabrication to derive a product known as aluminium grills made out of extruded aluminium products. If that fact situation is accepted, then the Tribunal was wholly incorrect in holding that the aluminium grills are nothing but extruded aluminium products and therefore, they would fall under Entry 7 of Code 61.

Income Tax

Income tax - Whether disclosures made under Voluntary Disclosure Scheme can be brought to tax under block assessment proceedings - YES, rules Delhi HC

ASSESSEE is an individual and was working as a broker/agent in aluminum market. Search and seizure operation under Section 132 of the Act was conducted on 27th October, 1998. Thereafter, statutory notice under Section 158BC of the Act was issued to which the assessee had filed the return dated 24th December, 1999 declaring 'nil' undisclosed income. Assessee had earlier made a disclosure of Rs.2,85,00,000/- on 23rd December, 1997 under Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997. Thereafter, certificate under Section 68(2) under the said scheme was issued to him on 24th December, 1997. As per the said certificate, the cash and bank balance declared as on 31st March, 1997 was Rs.1,28,58,390/-. During the course of search, the assessee had surrendered cash amount of Rs.30,10,000/-.

In the block assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer issued notice dated 14th September, 2000 why Rs.30,10,000/- found in cash should not be treated as undisclosed income of the respondent assessee for the period 1st April, 1998 to 28th October, 1998 and added in the block assessment.

Service Tax

Is Advertisement Tax collected by Municipal Corporation liable to Service Tax?: Issues to be referred to Third Member: CESTAT

THE appellants-Jalandhar Municipal Corporation entered into a contract with one M/s Shri Durga Publicity Service and certain other parties for investing into the construction of certain Built, Operate, Own and Transfer (BOOT) projects.

In return, the said parties were granted permission to put up specified number of sky-signs, unipoles, kiosks, lollipops etc. at different parts of Jalandhar-Kaparthala railway over-bridge and also rent certain shops under the said railway over-bridge constructed during the period 1.04.06 to 31.03.09. Such places given to the parties under the contract were being used by them for putting advertisements or further allotting the same to the advertisers.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements