TIOL-DDT 180 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT
180</font><br>
16 08 2005<br>
Tuesday</b></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<b>Plastic materials processed in India – exemption</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Sl. No. 73 of the table to Notification No. 6/2002-Central Excise, exempts plastic
materials processed in India out of certain materials. Now this notification
is amended to delete Chapter 55 (man-made staple fibre) from the list of inputs
for this process.<br>
<br>
Incidentally, this notification is strange; it exempts goods processed in <b>INDIA</b>.
Why India is specifically mentioned in this particular exemption? Are all other
goods not manufactured in India and not exempt? Can the government tax goods
manufactured outside India or for that matter exempt goods not manufactured
in India?. <br>
<br>
The confusion does not end here. The explanation to this notification clarifies
that this exemption is not applicable to goods cleared from <br>
1. FTZ<br>
2. SEZ<br>
3. EOU<br>
<br>
The notification reads like this </font></p>
<table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width=487
style='width:365.5pt;border-collapse:collapse;mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'>
<tr style='mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes'>
<td width=47 valign=top style='width:35.1pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'>
<p class=tabletext><span lang=EN-IN style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;
mso-ansi-language:EN-IN'>73<o:p></o:p></span></p></td>
<td width=67 valign=top style='width:50.5pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'>
<p class=tabletext><span lang=EN-IN style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;
mso-ansi-language:EN-IN'>39.01 to 39.14<o:p></o:p></span></p></td>
<td width=236 valign=top style='width:176.75pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'>
<p class=tabletext><span lang=EN-IN style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;
mso-ansi-language:EN-IN'><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Plastic
materials reprocessed in <b
style='mso-bidi-font-weight:normal'>India</b> out of the scrap or the waste
of goods falling within Chapters 39, 54, 56, 59, 64, 84, 85, 86, 87, 90,
91, 92, 93, 94, 95 and 96<o:p></o:p></font></span></p>
<p class=tabletext><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><i style='mso-bidi-font-style:normal'><span lang=EN-IN
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-ansi-language:EN-IN'>Explanation</span></i><span
lang=EN-IN style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-ansi-language:
EN-IN'>. - For the removal of doubts it is hereby clarified that nothing contained
in this exemption shall apply to plastic materials reprocessed in a free
trade zone, a <span class=GramE>special<span style='mso-spacerun:yes'>
</span>economic</span><span style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>zone or
a hundred per cent export-oriented under-taking and brought to any other
place in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">India</st1:place></st1:country-region>.<o:p></o:p></span></font><font size="2"><span
lang=EN-IN style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-ansi-language:
EN-IN'><o:p></o:p></span></font><span
lang=EN-IN style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-ansi-language:
EN-IN'><o:p></o:p></span></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">First
of all Section 5A of the Central Excise Act clearly stipulates that exemption
notifications unless specified are not applicable to EOU/FTZ/SEZ. So none of
the exemption notifications are applicable to these units. Then why should this
notification specifically say that the exemption is not applicable to these
units?.<br>
<br>
Secondly and more importantly excise duty is not leviable on units in the SEZ.
But this notification does not understand that concept. <br>
<br>
If at all this notification had to be amended, these issues should have been
addressed. But the government in its wisdom amended the notification to delete
chapter 55. <br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2005/etariff05_031.htm">NOTIFICATION
NO. 31/ 2005-CENTRAL EXCISE, Dated : August 12, 2005</a></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<b>Why can’t departmental adjudicators decide the case immediately after
hearing – on the same day - when Tribunals and Courts can do it?</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
While referring to the Board’s circular No. 80/2005 – Service Tax
suggesting that orders should normally be issued within a month of the date
of completion of the personal hearing, DDT 178 on 12.8.2005 had asked, <b>“Incidentally
why can’t departmental adjudicators decide the case immediately after
hearing – on the same day when Tribunals and Courts can do it?”
</b><br>
<br>
An officer was quick to point out,<br>
<br>
When Officers are expected to attend various works apart from adjudication,
passing of orders on the same day of hearing is next to impossibility and in
no way they could be treated on par with Tribunals and Courts.<br>
<br>
Thank you, Sir for your quick reaction, but Commissioner (Appeals) does not
have any other work other than passing orders. No Commissioner (Appeals) ever
passes an order immediately after hearing the appeal. Why?<br>
<br>
The institution of Commissioner (Appeals) needs a complete overhaul. First of
all his office should be like a courtroom open to the public. Similarly when
executive officers hear cases, they should sit in a court room open to the public.
Let the department also be properly represented in these hearings preferably
by the officer who passed the order or the one who investigated the case. If
it is not possible to dictate the order in the open court, at least the operative
part of the order can be pronounced in the open court and recorded. This will
eliminate all chances of manoeuvres and management in adjudications –
at least to a large extent. <br>
<br>
Reading is not a favourite pastime with many adjudicators and most of their
orders are written by Inspectors and Superintendents who are not present during
the hearings and so they simply do not know what happened during the hearing.
And when the order is put up for signature, the adjudicator does not remember
what happened during the personal hearing. So even in the rare cases when the
adjudicating officer is convinced about the case during the hearing, this conviction
is not found in the ultimate order, because of the gap. <br>
<br>
And if the order is passed immediately, most of the post hearing operations
(sleazy) can be avoided. </font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Dial
108 for emergency help</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
While the rest of India was busy hoisting the flag on Independence Day, Union
Minister for Communications and IT Dayanidhi Maran inaugurated a great programme
in Hyderabad – <b>Dial 108</b> of Emergency Management and Research Institute
(EMRI), an initiative by Andhra Pradesh Government and Satyam Computers Services
Ltd. Call `108' which is similar to 911 and 1123 services in the US and the
UK, would ensure timely and appropriate help for any emergency situation. If
you find somebody hurt in a road accident, just call 108 and the victim will
be taken to the nearest hospital. I dialled 108 at 2.30 am today and there was
a chirpy girl answering the phone in a vibrant voice. And this was a few hours
after the programme was officially inaugurated. It seems Satyam has spent about
Rs 40 Crores on this project. This is all about corporate communications.<br>
<br>
<font color="#FF6666"><b>Until tomorrow with more DDT<br>
<br>
Have a nice day. <br>
<br>
Mail your comments to</b></font> <a href="vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com
</a></font></p>
</body>
</html>