Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Import of Vessels - Duty to be paid and Bill of Entry to be filed? - Seized ships directed to be released: HC

SINCE the seized vessels were imported prior to 2000, prima facie, it appears that the customs duty on the said vessels were not payable. If the duty was not payable on the date of import and customs authorities have permitted user of the vessels all these years as imported goods, the customs authorities are not justified in abruptly seizing the vessels in question. The customs authorities shall forthwith release the seized vessels and shall not arrest or take any coercive steps in respect of all other vessels belonging to the petitioners till the adjudication order is passed in respect of the said seized vessels.

Income Tax

Whether when Revenue seizes cash in a search from assessee's premises, which turns out to be more than tax liability, entitlement of assessee to interest on refund of excess sum cannot be denied - YES, rules Bombay HC

SEARCH u/s 132 was conducted at business and residential premises of the deceased. On 4.9.1992, during said operation, cash of Rs.1,68,298/- was found and out of it, an amount of Rs.1,60,000/- was seized. On 24.12.1992, order u/s 132(5) determining provisionally total tax liability at Rs.3,34,492/- was passed and seized cash was appropriated till orders u/s 143(3) on regular assessment were passed. On 16.03.1995 order of regular assessment came to be passed and total income was assessed at Rs. 2,69,200/. Net tax demanded was Rs.34,572/. The petitioner paid that tax in cash in May 1995. The petitioner claimed that an amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- seized from him was neither appropriated nor treated as advance tax.

Central Excise

Pipes used for water supply projects wherein bulk of water has been supplied for human and animal consumption - even when it was used in industry, it was used for gardening and flushing of toilets - substantive benefit under exemption notification cannot be denied: CESTAT

THE notification does not stipulate that pipes should be supplied to projects which supplies water exclusively for human or animal consumption. Therefore, so long as these pipes are used for water supply projects wherein bulk of the water has been supplied for human or animal consumption, applying the ratio of the judgments cited supra and relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant, the benefit of notification no. 06/2006-CE has to be granted and cannot be denied.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements