TIOL-DDT 1837 · 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 1837</font><br> 17.04.2012<br> Tuesday</strong></font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Tariff Value - Hike in Brass Scrap and Poppy Seeds; Marginal Change for Gold and Silver</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has increased the tariff values of Brass Scrap (all grades) from USD 4237 to USD 4285 and increased the tariff value of poppy seeds from USD 2853 to 3680.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Tariff Value of Gold is increased from 539 to 542 USD per 10 grams and the tariff value of silver is increased from 1032 to 1051 per kilogram. Tariff value was fixed for gold and silver only recently by Notification No. 2/2012-Cus(NT) dated 13th January 2012.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">There is no change in the tariff value of other items. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2012/cnt12_033.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 33/2012 - Cus., (N.T.), Dated: April 16, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti dumping duty on Vitamin A Palmitate - Resurrected </font></strong></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NEARLY</strong> five years ago, in<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=6298" target="_blank"> <strong>DDT 732 - 01.11.2007</strong></a>, I wrote </font></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Provisional Anti dumping Duty was imposed on Vitamin A Palmitate originating in, or exported from, Switzerland and the People's Republic of China vide Notification No. 47/2007-CUSTOMS, dated the 28th March, 2007, which by the Notification itself had prescribed its demise date as 27th September, 2007. Now more than a month later, Government has imposed the anti dumping duty and it has the cheeks to say that it is effective from the first date of provisional imposition that is 28.3.2007. </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The period 27th September to 29th October 2007, when the government was in deep slumber is regularised. Remember the days of “the King can do no wrong” </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, definitive anti dumping duty was imposed by <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2007/ctariff07_112.htm" target="_blank">Notification No 112/2007-Cus., Dated: October 30, 2007</a></strong> with effect from 28.03.2007. This notification expired on 27.03.2012 and on this date, apparently the Board was sleeping and allowed the notification to lapse. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By 12th April 2012, they woke up and extended the validity of the notification up to 27 March 2013.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, there was no notification for anti dumping duty on this product from 28.03.2012 to 11.04.2012. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Even as per the Board's Circular, anti dumping duty cannot be collected during this period. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">How long will the Board continue with this kind of retrospective legislation and illegal collection? It is understandable if they forget one or two notifications, but it has become a habit with the Board to allow notifications to lapse and then resurrect them, with absolute impunity and contempt for the taxpayer. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Has the Indian Constitution given the Babus a blanket right to commit mistakes and rectify them retrospectively? Don't they ever feel ashamed that they are not able to amend their notifications before they (notifications, not babus) lapse? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why can't they outsource the notification manufacturing business? </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariffadd12_021.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 21/2012-Cus.,(ADD), Dated: April 12, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Seventh Corrigendum to Customs Notification No. 12/2012 - Malice in Blunderland?</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>WHAT</strong> is the Big Boss doing? Correcting the mistakes, he made! </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Seven Corrigenda have been issued to Notification No. 12/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012. The corrigenda have no serial numbers and nobody in the world has a clue as to how many corrigenda have been issued. Why can't the Board correct these mistakes by proper amendments to notifications? The Board is not able to issue notifications properly and on time; not able to keep track of their own notifications; not able to promote their officers – what does the Board exist for? Is it a Holiday Home? </font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Health Expert is New World Bank President </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Dr. JIM </strong>Yong Kim, President of Dartmouth College in US is the new President of the World Bank with effect from July 1st 2012. Dr. Kim is a co-founder of Partners in Health (PIH) and a former director of the Department of HIV/AIDS at the World Health Organization (WHO). Before assuming the Dartmouth presidency, Dr. Kim held professorships at Harvard Medical School and the Harvard School of Public Health. He also served as chair of the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, Chief of the Division of Global Health Equity at Brigham and Women's Hospital, and director of the François Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights at the Harvard School of Public Health. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dr. Kim is President Obama's nominee for the top banking job. </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"> – Wednesday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p> <p><font 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"><strong><font color="#663399">Central Excise</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Inputs lying in stock on date on which notification exempts final product - eligible for credit: HC </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>EVEN</strong> though final product may be exempt from payment of excise, the assessee cannot be asked to reverse the Modvat credit already taken by it. A right accrued to the assessee on the date when they paid the tax on the raw materials or the inputs, that right would continue until the facility available thereto gets worked out or until those goods existed. </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 provisions of Section 50(2) can be invoked in case of land on footing that land formed part of block of assets - NO, rules Delhi HC </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>issues before the Bench are - Whether land can be said to be a depreciable asset; Whether land forms part of the block of assets even when no rate of depreciation being prescribed and whether the provision of Section 50(2) of the Act can be invoked in the case of land on the footing that the land formed part of the block of assets. And the verdict goes against the Revenue. </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">Residential flats - sale of fully built flats - not taxable before Finance Act 2010 came into force:: CESTAT</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> question involved in these appeals is whether the respondents were doing any service for the prospective buyers or were doing the construction activity for themselves and were only engaged in sale of flats with no component of service to the buyers. During the period under dispute the impugned activity did not involve any service to the prospective buyers and the construction activity undertaken by the Respondents were for their own benefit to meet the contract for sale of future flats to be constructed. </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 Day</font></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> </body> </html>