TIOL-DDT 1836 · 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 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><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 1836</font><br>
16.04.2012<br>
Monday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Single Common EST Return instead of ER1, ER3 and ST3 - Draft Released </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC</strong> has released a draft EST-Return to replace the present ER1, ER3 and ST3 Returns.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">According to the Board, One of the purposes of the Return is to ensure the payment of the duty/ service tax in time. Accordingly, it is proposed to align the payment cycle and the return cycle. Under Central Excise Rules, the returns and payment cycles are aligned already. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">On Service Tax side at present, every assessee files the six monthly return (Rule 7 of Service Tax Rules 1994) whereas the payment cycle is as follows as per Rule 6 of the said rules </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">a. Quarterly for the individual, proprietary firm and partnership firm </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">b. All others - monthly. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Following amendments are proposed in the Service Tax Rules, 1994 to align the payment and return cycles: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">a. Quarterly payment and quarterly return for assesses who had paid Service Tax of Rs 25 lakhs or less including the payments made by utilizing the CENVAT credit, during the preceding financial year. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">b. Monthly payment and monthly return for all other assesses who had paid Service Tax of more than Rs 25 lakhs including the payments made by utilizing the <em>CENVAT credit</em>, during the previous financial year </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">c. Quarterly payment and quarterly return for all the new assesses. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board wants the Chief Commissioners to circulate the circular and Draft EST Form to the officers and trade formations for their comments, which are to be sent to the Board latest by May 15. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the new Format, under item 6 -<strong> Details of CENVAT Credit taken and utilized,</strong> there is only one column for Education Cess, which the asterisk mark *** explains as Education Cess & Secondary education Cess. But in Item 7 <strong>Details of Payment made</strong>, Education Cess and Secondary education Cess are shown separately. Will this not lead to confusion? </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/vacancie_it_ombudsman_2012.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Draft Circular in F No 201/05/2011-CX.6; dated April 13 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board badly needs an English Teacher </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT </strong>is never tired of campaigning for appointment of an English teacher in the Board to correct their spelling and grammar mistakes. After all, they are in the business of law making and the faulty laws they make are analysed by the Supreme Court, as the legislative will of about 800 honourable parliamentarians. They SHOULD be a little more careful while drafting these LAWS. Since they have chosen to be careless, the least they can do is to appoint an English teacher who can be assigned the correction job. In fact, Microsoft Word can help them to check their grammar and spelling mistakes. But as they, in their mighty wisdom, have chosen not to rely on Microsoft (who is after all an accused assessee under their control) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Just have a look at the Draft Circular detailed above. [The proper usage is in brackets in red]. </font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Extracts from the circular: </font></p>
<table border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1 </font></em></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ER.1 </font></em></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Monthly </font></em></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">All the <strong>assesses</strong> (<font color="#FF0000">assessees</font>) except those filing ER2 or ER.3 </font></em></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3 </font></em></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ST-3 </font></em></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Six Monthly </font></em></p></td>
<td valign="top"><p><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">All the Service Tax Assessee's (<font color="#FF0000">Assessees – no need of apostrophe</font>) </font></em></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>3.0 One of the purpose (<font color="#FF0000">purposes</font>) of the return is to ensure the payment of the duty/ service tax in time. Accordingly (<font color="#FF0000">Accordingly,</font>) it is propsed (<font color="#FF0000">proposed</font>) to <strong>also</strong> align the payment cycle and the return cycle. Under Central Excise Rules (<font color="#FF0000">Rules</font><font color="#FF6633">,</font>) the returns and payment cycles are aligned already. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">4.0 On Service Tax side at present every asssessee (<font color="#FF0000">assessee</font>) files the six monthly return (Rule 7 of Service Tax Rules 1994) whereas the payment cycle is as follows as per the Rule 6 of the said rules </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT</strong> has left out many mistakes, which an English teacher would have corrected.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">What can you say about a tax department, which does not know the spelling of <strong>ASSESSEE</strong>? </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board Learns from Didi - Warns Officers Against Comments in Facebook </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ONE</strong> of the qualities that anyone in Authority in India acquires is absolute contempt for dissidence. Remember Didi Mamta locking up a Professor for circulating a cartoon? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It has been brought to the notice of the CBEC that some officers are posting online comments relating to official matters on social networking sites such as Facebook, <em>causing confusion and avoidable controversy among officers in different parts of the country</em>.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board cites two incidents. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Personal views have been posted on a Supreme Court judgement dated 30.3.2012 on an SLP filed by the Department, including adverse comments on the seniority list relied upon by the department for the recent DPC conducted for promotion to the grade of Commissioners. It has been reported that the said post created confusion regarding the Apex court's judgement among officers in different parts of the country, and also needless controversy over seniority issues as well as the officially valid DPC, conducted under the aegis of UPSC. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The details of the live case of alleged evasion of central excise duty by a gutkha manufacturer were posted online by an officer, including extracts of the SCN, and comments were sought from fellow officers. The said post evoked various responses on the merits of the case from other officers. Discussing details of investigation on social networking sites ad online comments on merits, when adjudication or appellate proceedings may be underway, is completely unwarranted. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board has taken a serious view of the above incidents and states that the CCS (Conduct) Rules proscribe such conduct and wants the Chief Commissioners to advise their officers to refrain from posting online comments regarding official matters in the public domain in violation of conduct rules. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">What era are we living in? Can the Board really prohibit flow of information in this hi-tech world? What will happen if the officers use pseudonyms to express their views and what can the Board do if hundreds of mails are sent? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Look at the two instances referred by the Board. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the first case, there is a rumour all over the country that Board has really messed up the seniority issue and has gone ahead with a wrong list for the DPC for Commissioners, in spite of directions from the Supreme Court to recast the seniority lists. In a blog, it was stated, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00">The entire seniority list amongst appraisers has been manipulated and this has vitiated the 2005 List in as much as there are approximately 45-50 Appraisers who have jumped 6- 7 batches and been placed in the 2005 List in positions higher than the DR Group A officers. In fact, if we go by the Seniority List, which has been purportedly followed, in the recently concluded DPC by UPSC, there is one officer who was actually working as an Appraiser under an officer from the 1991 batch who had in 2002 been promoted as a Joint Commissioner. This appraiser is now in the consideration list for the DPC for promotion as a Commissioner and in all probability will be promoted as a Commissioner, while his erstwhile Boss from the 1991 batch who was the Joint Commissioner then still continues to work as an Additional Commissioner!!!!. And what is worse, we may have a reversal of roles and this Appraiser may actually become the Commissioner under whom this Additional Commissioner will be working!!!!. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00">This is the kind of a fraud which is being perpetrated and most of the DR, Group A officers are helpless to do anything about it, because, the Board remains adamant in not circulating the seniority list which is being followed by UPSC for making the promotions. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe it was this blog that irked the Board.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And what is wrong in an officer discussing a case with his colleagues – will he not be benefitted by suggestions from perhaps better informed officers? In any case, many officers discuss these matters over phone and emails and Board has no objection! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Instead of killing the messenger, why can't they read the message? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=70&filename=pitara/sernews/order/Posting_comments_official_matters.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC F.No.Misc/P&V/2011 Dated: April 11, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Don't touch your Cow or Dog during your visit to India - US Customs Welcomes You </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ANY</strong> person entering the United States of America is required to fill in CBP Declaration Form 6059B. The passenger is required to give the following information, as explained by US Customs: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. Print your last (family) name. Print your first (given) name. Print the first letter of your middle name. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. Print your date of birth in the appropriate day/month/year boxes. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. Print the number of family members traveling with you (do not include yourself). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">4. Print your current street address in the United States. If you are staying at a hotel, include the hotel's name and street address. Print the city and the state in the appropriate boxes. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">5. Print the name of the country that issued your passport. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">6. Print your passport number </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">7. Print the name of the country where you currently live. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">8. Print the name of the country(ies) that you visited on your trip prior to arriving to the United States. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">9. If traveling by airline, print the airline's name and flight number. If traveling by vessel (ship), print the vessel's name. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">10. Are you traveling on a business (work-related) trip? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">11. Are you bringing with you: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">a. fruits, plants, food, or insects? (<font color="#FF0000">be sure that bread and salad given in the air have not slipped into your baggage</font>) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">b. meats, animals, or animal/wildlife products? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">c. disease agents, cell cultures, or snails? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">d. soil or have you visited a farm/ranch/pasture outside the United States? (<font color="#FF0000">If you have, will they put you back in the aircraft?</font>) </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">12. Have you or any family members traveling with you been in close proximity of (such as touching or handling) livestock outside the United States? (<font color="#FF3333">If you have touched the cow in your house during your visit to India, maybe you are in trouble!</font>) </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agonised Customs Officers in airports in India always find the Indian passengers returning from US to be the most troublesome, arguing with Customs on the Law about which they know nothing – but when they go back to US, they are prepared to swear on the holy cow that they have not touched it! </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Coffee Table Book On Indian Customs </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC</strong> is planning to bring out a Coffee Table Book On Indian Customs. The Directorate of Publicity and Public Relations has invited articles/visuals/anecdotes, which may be incorporated in the publication, from retired and serving officers. Why don't you include CHAs – they might have very interesting stories? </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"> – Tuesday'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">Appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) - High Court cannot extend period of limitation - Limitation Act expressly excluded: HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>WHEN </strong>a period of limitation is prescribed for filing of an appeal and the extent of the power to condone the delay is also prescribed by the statute, the exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution would clearly be not warranted to direct the adjudicatory or appellate authority to breach the provision for limitation. Once the legislature has laid down a period within which an appeal has to be filed and has prescribed the extent to which a delay beyond that period can be condoned, recourse to the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 would stand expressly excluded within the meaning of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963. </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 when Two Members develop difference of opinion and case is referred to Third Member who agrees with Member (J), Accountant Member can, even after becoming functus officio , reframe points of difference again - NO: ITAT Special Bench </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Third Member decided both the issues in favour of the assessee. While giving effect to the opinion of the Third Member, the Judicial Member passed the conformity order. But, the Accountant Member raised further objections as the finer points of differences between the Members were not addressed. Thus, the President constituted a Special Bench, and the issue involved interpretation of sub-section (4) of section 255 which provided that the point on which difference arose shall be decided in accordance with the opinion of the majority. The question to be considered was whether at that stage (i.e., the stage of giving effect to the opinion of the Third Member) it was legally permissible, having regard to the statutory provision, for a Member who was in the minority to decline to give effect to the opinion of the majority whatever be his reasons. In addition to the question of interpretation, it also involved the issue of judicial decorum. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service Tax </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Clearing and forwarding - Tribunal dismissed appeal for non-compliance of pre-deposit - Dismissal confirmed: HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ADJUDICATING</strong> Authority has considered most of the contracts entered into by the Assesse with various parties and has arrived at a conclusion that the transactions entered into by the assessee with those parties do not appear to be simply placing orders and earning commission, but it is much more than that. The Adjudicating Authority has also held that the credit notes clearly disclose that the Assessee has directly dealt with the goods in lifting them, providing of the vehicles and delivery of the goods. In these circumstances, the prima facie view formed by the Tribunal that the adjudicating authority had reason to believe that the assessee had rendered the clearing and forwarding agent's service cannot be faulted with. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Day</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"><strong> <a href="mailto:vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com </a></strong></font>
</div>
</body>
</html>