TIOL-DDT 1802 · 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><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=14276"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/ddt/ddt_1794.jpg" alt="DDT in Limca Book of Records" width="175" height="120" hspace="5" border="0" align="right"></a></font></strong></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1802</font><br>
24.02.2012 <br>
Friday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board <em><font color="#FF6633">desires</font></em> that CHALR Exam to be concluded by 30th June</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>REGULATION</strong> 12 of the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010 stipulates that an employee of authorized couriers or his employee can file electronic declaration in respect of imported or export goods provided he has passed the examination referred to in regulation 8 or regulation 19 of the <strong>Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations</strong> (CHALR), 2004. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Representations were received from the trade as well as from field formations to extend the transition period, which was already extended upto 31.12.2011, for a further period of six months i.e. up to 30th June, 2012, to the employees of authorized couriers to appear in the examination referred to in regulation 8 or regulation 19 of the CHALR, 2004. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board has taken note of genuine difficulties reported by Commissionerates in holding examination referred to in regulation 19 of CHALR, 2004 in time. Accordingly, it has been decided to extend the transition period from the date of publication of regulation for examination referred to in regulation 19 of CHALR, 2004 up to 30.06.2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board <strong>desires</strong> that necessary examinations under regulation 19 of CHALR, 2004 should be got conducted and <strong>completed in all respects</strong> by respective Commissionerates without fail by 30.06.2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">When Board instructions are disobeyed with impunity, will the field care for Board's desire? And why should Board desire for an examination which has enormous statutory effect? Why can't Board take a decision and implement it?</font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2012/cuscir12_005.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No. 5/2012-Cus., Dated: February 23, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping on Sodium Tripoly Phosphate - Withdrawn </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>PROVISIONAL</strong> anti dumping duty was imposed on Sodium Tripoly Phosphate originating in, or exported from, People's Republic of China, by Notification No. 96/2010-Cus dated 21.09.2010. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Definitive anti dumping duty on the product for a period of five years with effect from the date of imposition of provisional anti-dumping duty, that is, the 21st September 2010, was imposed by Notification No. 58/2011-Cus dated 08.07.2011.</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now this Notification No. 58/2011-Cus, is rescinded. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariffadd12_013.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 13/2012-Customs (ADD), Dated: February 22, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export to Nepal - Liberalisation </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NOTIFICATION</strong> No. 21/2004-CENT dated 06.09.2001, prescribes the conditions and procedure for granting rebate on the excise duty paid on materials used in the manufacture or processing of export goods to any country other than Nepal and Bhutan. Now the restriction is only for Bhutan. That is exports to Nepal will also be eligible for input rebate. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government had amended six Central Excise NT Notifications to delete the special procedure for export of goods to Nepal. Those notifications prescribed the procedure, conditions etc. for exports to countries other than Nepal and Bhutan. By Notifications 24–29/CENT dated 05.12.2011, export to Nepal was made just like export to any other country but at that time, obviously they forgot about amending Notification No. 21/2004, which they have amended now. Anyway, these notifications are effective from 1st March 2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>But what about Service Tax</strong>? In<strong> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=13834" target="_blank">DDT 1750 - 12.12.2011</a></strong>, it was pointed out, </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Notification No. 11/2005-Service Tax, dated 19.04.2005 grants rebate of Service Tax on taxable services exported to countries other than <strong>Nepal </strong>and Bhutan. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Similarly, Notification No. 12/2005-Service Tax, dated 19.04.2005 grants rebate of the duty paid on excisable inputs or service tax and cess paid on taxable input services used in providing taxable service exported to countries other than <strong>Nepal </strong>and Bhutan. </font></em></p>
<p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why Nepal is retained in these two notifications? Has the Board forgotten these notifications or is it intentional? </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2012/exnt12_02.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 2/2012-CX., (N.T.), Dated: February 22, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT Corrects Spelling Mistake in DEPB Rate Schedule </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DESCRIPTION</strong> of export item at Sl. No 915, Product Code-62 "Chemicals" of the DEPB Rate Schedule had a typographical error. It was wrongly appearing as “Vinyl Oyridine Latex”. It is corrected to read as "Vinyl Pyridine Latex". </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=47&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10pn100.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT Public Notice No. 100/(RE-2010)/2009-2014, Dated: February 23, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export
of non-basmati rice through Land Custom Stations on Indo-Bangladesh and
Indo-Nepal border</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NOTIFICATION</strong> No. 71 dated 09.09.2011 made export of non-basmati rice free by the private parties from privately held stocks only through Custom EDI ports. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now export of non-basmati rice is also permitted from non-EDI Land Custom Stations on Bangladesh and Nepal border. The only requirement for export through LCS will be registration of quantity with DGFT. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">State Trading Enterprises (STEs) including M/s. NCCF & NAFED have also been permitted to export privately held stocks of non-basmati rice. </font></p>
<p><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10not098.htm" target="_blank"></a></font></strong><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10not099.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Notification No. 99/(RE-2010)/2009-2014, Dated: February 23, 2012</a></font></strong></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export of wheat through Land Custom Stations (LCS) on Indo-Bangladesh and Indo-Nepal border</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>SIMILARLY</strong>, export of wheat was free, but only through Custom EDI ports. Now export of wheat is also permitted from non-EDI Land Custom Stations on Bangladesh and Nepal border. The only requirement for export through LCS will be registration of quantity with DGFT. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10not098.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Notification No. 98/(RE-2010)/2009-2014, Dated: February 23, 2012 </a></font></strong></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Today is Central Excise Day </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL greets all excise officials, as they get ready to celebrate Central Excise Day today.</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Before 1889, the Salt, Abkari and Customs departments were together. By the Madras Salt Act 1889, Salt and Abkari were organised under the Madras Salt department and it functioned from the Custom House at Madras. The Salt and Abkari department, which was separated from the Customs but functioned from the Custom House, Madras, was the initial Excise administration in Madras. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Salt department, under the Collector of Salt Revenue, Madras had three divisions - Northern, Central and Southern. Northern division consisted of Cocanada, Nellore, Massulipattinam and Chicacole. Central Division consisted of Chengleput, Bellary, Arcot and Cuddalore. Southern division consisted of sub-divisions like Nagapattinam, Tinnavelley, Trichinapally, and Calicut. Besides Salt and Abkari revenue, the Salt department also administered all the Customs out ports in the coastal areas and land customs stations. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In 1924, Salt revenue was separated from Salt and Abkari department of Madras Presidency. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A separate Salt department was carved out with Collector of Salt Revenue as the head. This department also looked after the Customs out ports. The Salt department located its Offices in various places like Triplicane, Cathedral Road and finally Sterling Road. There were 13 Customs Outports in the Madras Presidency at Cuddalore, Nagapattinam, Portonovo, Vizagapatnam, Baindoor, Gangoli, Cannanore, Moolky, Badagara, Ponnani, Allepey, Quilon and Trivandrum. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Salt Amendment Act transferred the Madras Salt Department to the administrative control of Government of India in 1926. This was a major milestone in the centralisation of Modern day Central Excise Department. In 1932, Rules were framed for the recruitment of Personnel for the Salt department. New uniforms were also prescribed during this period. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In 1930 Silver was made an excisable commodity. In 1931, Provisional Collection of Taxes Act was legislated. In 1934, more commodities were brought under the Tax like Iron and Steel, Matches, Sugar and Mechanical Lighters. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A Tariff Act was legislated in 1934. Elaborate procedures, rules and regulations were framed for assessment, levy and collection of duty on the new excisable commodities like matches and sugar. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">During this time, the Central Board of Revenue was constituted in 1934. Collector of Salt Revenue, Madras looked after three fold functions i.e. administration of Salt Act under the Central Board of Revenue; administration of Excise on matches, sugar and other commodities under the provincial governments and administration of Customs Outports and Land Customs stations. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now that many commodities came under the tax net the need for streamlining the system was felt acutely by the colonial government. The British constituted King's Committee to study the feasibility of centralising the administration of Central Excises under the Central Board of Revenue. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mr. F.C. KING, was deputed by the British Government to study the feasibility of the Government of India taking over the administration of Central Excises from the Provincial Governments. Hitherto, the respective Provincial Governments administered the revenue department and the collection of tax from the various commodities. This report is of great historical importance as it gave broad insight into the then existing system and the guidelines to be followed to centralise the administration of Central Excise under the Government of India </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Madras Salt Department at that time had the administration of land Customs (and outports). The report had noted that the staff employed by the Madras Government for the purposes of the administration of the Central Excises was of the lowest grade (the report desired the upgradation of these posts in Madras Presidency when centrally taken over). Mr. Greenfield, then Collector of Salt Revenue, Madras, with whom Mr.King had consulted, had informed that Inspectors in every circle of his jurisdiction except Tuticorin circle are available to supervise the administration of Central Excises if entrusted to his Department. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The report had compared the system of assessment and control over sugar and match factories in the various provinces. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The total expenditure of collection of Central Excise was estimated to be about Rs.4,97,000/- per year. Consequent to the report, the administration of Central Excise was taken over from the provincial governments by the Madras Salt Department (under the control of Government of India) under the Central Board of Revenue. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Due to compulsion of War finance, the Government had to mobilize additional resources and took a bold decision of introducing excise levy on un-manufactured tobacco. Survey on feasibility of imposing excise duty on tobacco was made in 1942. The advent of excise on tobacco led to mass recruitment of personnel to cover every nook and corner of the country. The Madras Central Excise Collectorate at that time (1944) covered the whole of then Madras Presidency from Vijayanagaram in the North to Kanyakumari in the South and from Madras in the East to South Canara in the West. The Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 also came into existence subsequently. It was on 24th February 1944 that the CESA was enacted and that is why we celebrate this day of <font color="#FF6633"><strong>February 24 as Central Excise Day</strong></font>. </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"> - Monday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_hammer.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="100" height="84" hspace="5" border="0" align="left">Central Excise</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Plea that assessee is forced to pay equal penalty under Section 11 AC because adjudication order did not mention benefit of reduced penalty of 25% of duty - Facts of case different from K P Pouches case - No attempt by assessee to pay duty amount - No error in order of CESTAT: Delhi HC </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>VIDE</strong> adjudication order dated 5th March 2004 an amount of Rs 17,88,262/- was confirmed on account of duty payable on clandestine clearances. Penalty equal to the duty was also imposed under Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessee was unsuccessful at Commissioner (Appeals) and the appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) was also dismissed by the CESTAT in - <em><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=34&filename=legal/cestat/2010/2010-TIOL-1239-CESTAT-DEL.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2010-TIOL-1239-CESTAT-DEL</font></a></strong></em>. Since the Tribunal order did not contain any specific finding on the plea raised by the assessee on penalty under Section 11 AC, the matter was agitated by the assessee before the Delhi High Court. The High Court remanded the matter to the CESTAT to deal with the contention of the assessee regarding penalty. Consequently, the CESTAT rejected the rectification application filed by the assessee. Thus, the matter reached the High Court for the second time. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Income Tax </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whether portfolio manger is an agent who does trading of shares on behalf of client with motive to earn profit, and hence gains attributable to such transactions is business profit and not STCG even if client has shown same as investment in books - YES, rules ITAT</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ASSESSEE</strong> firm is engaged in the business of providing technical, marketing and maintenance services for earth-movers tyres and trading in tyres. Assessee filed its ROI declaring LTCG and STCG. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO observed that the assessee entered into numerous purchases and sales of shares, and hence the profits of the assessee were taxable as business income and not STCG or LTCG. The CIT(A) affirmed the order of the AO. In appeal before the ITAT the assessee argued that all the transactions were delivery based transactions and STT was paid on these transactions.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping - Government not bound to impose anti dumping duty on recommendation of Designated Authority; Court cannot sit in judgement over wisdom of policy of Legislature or executive: HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>TASK</strong> of DA is limited of ascertainment of various factors such as factum of dumping if at all, ascertainment of extent of dumping, injury to the domestic market and amount of dumping duty in his opinion would eliminate injury. These are issues which necessarily would be governed by material that may be brought on record and ascertainment of relevant factors on basis of facts presented. DA while examining these issues would not be involved in ascertaining other consequences of imposition or otherwise of Anti-dumping duty. It is necessarily the task of the Central Government to ascertain such factors and to come to conclusion whether despite such recommendations, Anti-dumping duty should be imposed or not. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Monday for the judgements </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Weekend.</font></p>
<p><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>