TIOL-DDT 1825 · 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 size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1825 </font><br>
</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>28.03.2012 <br>
</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Wednesday </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Budget 2012 - Corrigenda Galore - continues </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>corrigenda are rolling out unabated. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In our Budget Analysis story, <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=14565">Cement in Packaged Form - Unpack The Confusion Please</a>, </strong> we had pointed out, </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>What about the cement cleared in packaged from cleared to institutional buyers where RSP is not required to be printed? Can they pay duty @12% ad valorem under Sl No 3 of the Table? Will the Departmental officers not raise objection and seek to demand full duty on the ground that the cement was not cleared in packaged form? </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>In Notification No 4/2006 CE, fortunately we had this proviso to take care of the above situation: </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Provided also that where the retail sale price of the goods are not required to be declared under the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, and thus not declared, the duty shall be determined as is in the case of goods cleared in other than packaged form </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>This proviso is missing in the Notification No 12/2012 CE. Let us wait for a clarification / amendment or Show Cause Notices! </em></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fortunately, Board has amended the notification with a corrigendum by inserting a proviso. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is very difficult to keep track of the corrigenda as they have no running serial numbers and nobody knows when they are published and given a choice, the Board would like to keep them a secret at least from prying journalists and troublesome assessees. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2012/corrigendum_etariff12_12_I.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Corrigendum dated 22-03-2012 to Notification No. 12/2012-CX</strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Dhamra
Port is now a port for all goods </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DHAMRA</strong> port in Orissa had been appointed as a Coastal Port for carrying on of trade in "all types of coal and limestone”. Now it is appointed as a coastal port for trade in "all <strong>class </strong> of goods except containers, project imports, hazardous cargo and liquid cargo, but including carbon black feed stock and edible oil" [<font color="#FF6633">This should have been all <strong>classes </strong> - even the grammar of the Board needs improvement - that's why DDT often suggests appointment of an English teacher in the Board</font>] </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2012/cnt12_025.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 25/2012- Cus.,(NT.), Dated: March 23, 2012</a> </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Revised Treaty of Trade between India and Nepal - Rebate </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DUTY</strong> refund procedure (DRP) prescribed by Notification No. 20/2004-CE(NT) dated 6.9.2004 has been rescinded vide Notification No. 25/2011-CE(NT) dated 5.12.2011 w.e.f 1st March, 2012. Export to Nepal under claim of rebate is permissible under Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 6.9.2004 as amended by Notification No. 24/2011-CE(NT) dated 5.12.2011 issued under rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and under bond/LUT vide Notification No. 42/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.6.2001 [as amended by Notification No. 26/2011-CE(NT) dated 5.12.2011] in terms of Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Clarifications have been sought as to whether in view of rescinding of Notification No. 20/2004-CE(NT) dated 6.9.2004, goods cleared under DRP invoices by Indian exporters from their factories etc. prior to 1st March, 2012 but yet to be exported to Nepal within the time limit of six months prescribed in Notification No. 20/2004-CE(NT) are to be treated as exports under DRP procedure or as normal export in terms of Notification No. 19/2004-CE(NT) dated 6.9.2004 as amended. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Board clarifies </strong>: </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Such exports shall be treated as exports under the DRP procedure and duty refund will accordingly be credited to the Govt. of Nepal as per the procedure laid down under the DRP. The rebate element will not be admissible to Indian exporters in respect of such goods. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board has also been requested to clarify whether exports under claim of rebate under amended Notifications No. 19/2004-CE(NT)dated 6.9.2004 or under bond in terms of amended Notification No. 42/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.6.2001 are to be permitted even when the export proceeds are paid in Indian Rupees. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Board clarifies </strong>: </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Neither Rule 18 or Rule 19 of Central Excise Rules, 2002, nor the above mentioned notifications make any distinction on the basis of mode of payment of currency for exports. It is therefore clarified that exports to Nepal will continue to be permissible irrespective of whether the payments are made in Indian currency or foreign convertible currency as long as they are in accordance with applicable RBI guidelines. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2012/excircular961.htm" target="_blank">Circular No. 961/04/2012-CX., Dated: March 26, 2012 </a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FTP - Extension of Prohibition of Exports of Pulses </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>EXPORT</strong> of pulses was initially prohibited for a period of six months vide Notification No. 15 (RE-2006)/2004-2009 dated 27.6.2006 which was extended from time to time. This extension is upto 31.03.2012 in terms of Notification No. 35(RE-2010)/2009-2014 dated 23.03.2011. Now, the prohibition on export of pulses is being extended upto 31.03.2013. This prohibition will not apply to Kabuli Chana. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In addition, the prohibition on export of pulses upto 31.03.2013 will not apply to export of 10,000 MTs of organic pulses and lentils per annum as permitted through Notification No. 51(RE-2010)/2009-2014 dated 03.06.2011. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10not109.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Notification No. 109 (RE - 2010)/2009-2014, Dated: March 27, 2012 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FTP - Procedure for refund / revalidation of DEPBs/Reward Scrips for re-credit of 4% CVD (SAD). </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT</strong> has amended Paragraph 2.13.2A of the Handbook of Procedures (Vol.1), 2009-14, which will now read as; </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>"Only for the purpose of utilisation of re-credit of 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) of customs, the freely transferable duty credit scrips (including DEPB), shall be deemed to have been revalidated till 30.6.2012. No further endorsement of such scrips by the respective RA shall be required under the following circumstances:- </em></font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>(i) if the endorsement has been made by Regional Authority on or before 15.9.2011 but the re-credit remains unutilised; </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Or </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>(ii) if the consolidated certificate (Credit Note) have been issued by Customs between 1.9.2011 to 30.4.2012. In such scrips, the amount indicated in the consolidated certificate by customs shall be deemed to have been re-credited."</em></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This will reduce the transaction cost and procedural burden as it will facilitate utilisation of re-credit without requiring it to be presented to RA of DGFT for an endorsement of revalidation. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=47&filename=notification/dgft/2010/dgft10pn105.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Public Notice No. 105/2009-2014(RE-2010), Dated: March 27, 2012 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>13 per cent of total excise duty paid by tobacco users </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> total revenue collected from central excise duty during the financial year 2011-12 (upto January, 2012) is about Rs. 1,14,046 Crore (provisional). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The total excise duty collected from tobacco products during the financial year 2011-12 (upto January, 2012) is about Rs. 14,804 Crore (provisional). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Tobacco Kills, but Government is the major beneficiary. </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CESTAT - Manipulation of Date of Hearing By Registry </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IF</strong> the Bench does not sit on a particular day, the matters of that day are left without a date resulting in scope for manipulation of the date by the Registry, according to a Circular issued by the Registrar of CESTAT. Therefore, it is directed that if there is no court on any particular day, all the matters of that day will be listed before the Bench during next week for fixing the date of hearing. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/cestat_circular12.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CESTAT Circular Dated: March 23, 2012 </strong></font></a></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"> - Thursday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><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"></font>Central Excise </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>EOU - Goods manufactured by EOU out of raw materials supplied by another EOU and subsequently cleared to DTA - Eligible for benefit of Notification No.8/97-CE; An exemption notification has to be interpreted in light of words employed by it and not on any other basis: Supreme Court </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A</strong> provision especially a fiscal statute providing for an exemption, concession or exception has to be construed strictly. A person who claims exemption or concession must establish clearly that he is covered by the provision(s) concerned and, in case of doubt or ambiguity, the benefit of it must go to the State. The notification requires to be interpreted in the light of the words employed by it and not on any other basis. There cannot be any addition or subtraction from the notification for the reason the exemption notification requires to be strictly construed by the Courts. The wordings of the exemption notification have to be given its natural meaning, when the wordings are simple, clear and unambiguous. </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 color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Whether essence of law for availing Sec 54F benefits is to ensure that capital gains earned by the assessee are invested in residential house irrespective of unfinished construction within 3 years - YES: High Court</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">THE </font></strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">AO came to the conclusion that the construction was not complete even after lapse of three years of time from the date of transfer of the shares on which the capital was derived. He held that the assessee had neither purchased the property within the period of two years nor constructed the property within the period of three years after the date of transfer of the asset, on which the capital gain was derived, and Section 54F was not applicable to the assessee. The CIT(A) held that the house which the assessee intended to purchase/construct was not even fit to be called a house, not to speak of residential house. It was neither purchased nor constructed in the true sense of the terms. Hence, the assessee was not eligible to the benefit u/s 54F. The Tribunal was of the opinion that the authorities below were not justified in depriving the exemption legitimately claimed by the assessee u/s 54F. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Customs</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2">Appeal dismissed by Tribunal for non-compliance under Section 129 E of Customs Act, 1962 – Party appeal against CESTAT order dismissed by High Court – Since the interim order of CESTAT has merged with High Court order on appeal, Tribunal becomes <em>functus officio </em> and cannot restore the appeal though pre-deposit was made later: Delhi HC </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">IN this case, the Tribunal ordered the respondent exporter to pre-deposit Rs 2.5 crores within eight weeks as a condition for hearing the appeal on merits. The issue involved in irregular claim of drawback of Rs 22 crores. Since the respondent failed to deposit the amount, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-compliance with the order of pre-deposit. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><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>
<div 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></div>
</body>
</html>