TIOL-DDT 1907 · 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 1907 </font><br>
24.07.2012<br>
Tuesday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Appointment of CE Officers as Customs Officers - Hyderabad Error Rectified </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AS</strong> per Notification No. <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2004/cnt04_83.htm" target="_blank">83/2004-Customs (N.T.)</a></strong> dated 30.06.2004, the Commissioners of Central Excise were appointed <em>to be Commissioners of Customs within their respective jurisdiction as specified under rule 3 of the Central Excise Rules 2002, subject to modification that such jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs in respect of the areas comprising the Airport, Inland Container Depot, Container Freight Station and Air Cargo Complex <strong>at Hyderabad</strong> notified under section 7 or, as the case may be, under section 8 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), exercisable by the Commissioner of Central Excise Hyderabad-I or Hyderabad-II or Hyderabad -III or Hyderabad-IV shall be exercised by the Commissioner of Central Excise Hyderabad -II. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the international airport near Hyderabad is at Shamshabad about 40 kms away from Hyderabad. This airport is not in Hyderabad, not even in Hyderabad District. So, this airport being under the jurisdiction of Hyderabad II Commissionerate was technically wrong. This lapse is now rectified by deleting the words, "at Hyderabad" from the notification. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2012/cnt12_064.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 64/2012 - Customs, (N T), Dated: July 23, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Common Adjudicators Appointed for DRI Cases </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC</strong> has appointed common adjudicating officers to adjudicate certain DRI cases.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2012/cnt12_062.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 62/2012 - Customs, (N T), Dated: July 23, 2012 and </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2012/cnt12_063.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 63/2012 - Customs, (N T), Dated: July 23, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I-T
- Assessee, exclusively engaged in blending and processing of tea as 100%
EoU, eligible for Sec 10B benefits - ITAT Sp Bench </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> question before the Special Bench was,<em> "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Assessees, who are in the business of blending & processing of tea and export thereof, can be said to be "Manufacturer/Producer" of the tea for the purpose of Section 10A/10B of the I.T. Act, 1961 ?" </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Special Bench in a detailed order dated 20.07.2012 held, <em> "the assessees who are in the business of blending and processing of tea and export thereof, in 100% EOUs are manufacturer/ producer of the tea for the purpose of claiming exemption u/s.10B of the Act. Further, assessees who are in the business of blending and processing of tea in respect of undertakings in free trade zones are manufacturer/producer of tea for the purpose of claiming exemption u/s. 10A of the Act." </em></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We bring you this order today. Please see <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=15507" target="_blank">Breaking News </a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service Tax - appeal against revision orders passed by Commissioner after 19.8.2009 - Appealable to Tribunal - CESTAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> Budget 2009, Board/Ministry decided to dump the much criticized "revision mechanism" vested in the Commissioner in terms of Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994 with a "review mechanism" by substituting the existing provisions with new provisions on the lines of Section 35E of the Central Excise Act, 1944. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">However, while giving a decent burial to the erstwhile Section 84 an explanation was introduced, which declared that any order passed by an adjudicating officer subordinate to the Commissioner of Central Excise immediately before the commencement of Clause (C) of Section 113 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009, shall continue to be dealt with by the Commissioner of Central Excise as if this section had not been substituted. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, a question arises as to where the appeal lies if such orders are passed by the Commissioner in terms of erstwhile Section 84. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=10798" target="_blank">DDT 1351 04 05 2010</a></strong>, had observed, <font color="#FF0000">recourse may be taken to Sections 6 and 6A of the General Clauses Act, 1897 to take care of such exigencies. This means that the appeals against Orders-in-Revision passed by the Commissioners for orders passed by the subordinate officers prior to this amendment coming into effect could be filed in CESTAT in terms of Section 86 of Finance Act, 1994. </font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the CESTAT in a landmark judgement has held that such orders are appealable to the Tribunal. </font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We will bring you the Tribunal order tomorrow. </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">FTP - ITC (HS) Schedule Amended in tune with Budget 2012 </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has amended the Schedule 1 - Import Policy of the ITC (HS), 2012, in respect of Chapters 24, 26, 48, 74, 75, 76, 78 and 79 to align them with the Tariff changes made in the Finance Act 2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2012/dgft12not007.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 7 (RE - 2012)/2009-2014 Dated: July 23, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Income
Tax - Service Tax paid in response to SCN without an Order - Eligible for
Deduction - ITAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A </strong>survey was carried out by the service tax authorities on 11-8-2006 and in pursuance of which a show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 19-10-2006, strong>firstly</strong>, as to why the service tax was not paid on a difference and liabilities written back under "advertisement agency services" and secondly, on annual volume discount under "business auxiliary services" categories and why outstanding service tax liability along with interest and penalty should not be levied. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">After carrying out various discussions with the service tax authorities, the assessee decided to pay the service tax liability along with interest to avoid further litigation and to buy peace of mind. The assessee deposited service tax liability along with the interest for the financial year 2001-2002, 2002-2003, 2003-2004, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. In the tax audit report, the payment was duly reported and was claimed as a revenue deduction under section 37(1). The Assessing Officer held that the amount of service tax and interest paid was a liability which was not crystallized during the year as there was no formal written order, but was paid in response to show cause notice only and further that whole matter was in dispute. He, therefore, held that the same cannot be allowed as deduction in the current year either under section 37 or under Section 43B. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>The ITAT observed, </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>It is not disputed that the assessee has paid service tax along with interest in this year which also included the amounts pertaining to the earlier assessment years. The only issue is whether liability can be said to have been crystallized without any formal order being passed by the service tax authorities. Once the payment of service tax has been made during the year, it does not make any difference whether the same is under dispute before the service tax authorities. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Deduction claimed by the assessee in respect of any sum paid by way of tax, duty, cess, or fee, shall be allowed only in computing the income referred to in Section 28 of that previous year in which such sum is actually paid by him, irrespective of the previous year in which the liability to pay was incurred on the payment of such sum as per method of accounting regularly employed by the assessee as per section145. For the claim of deduction of the sum paid against the liability of tax, duty, cess, fee, etc., the year of payment is relevant which is to be taken into account. The year in which the assessee incurred the liability to pay such tax, duty etc., has no relevance and cannot be linked in the matter of giving benefit of deduction under Section 43B.</font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Tribunal held,<em> "the amount of service tax along with interest paid by the assessee is allowable in view of the provisions of Section 43B." </em></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We will bring you this order also tomorrow.</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><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">PMLA</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) - PMLA, not only seeks to punish offenders, but also seeks to punish victims of such offences - Provisional Attachment Order and Confirmation Order are set aside as null and void: HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>PMLA,</strong> not only seeks to punish the offenders, but also seeks to punish the victims of such offences - Section 8 of PMLA in its entirety is accused-centric and Central Government-centric - It does not take into account the plight of victims of crime - There is an inherent lacuna in the PMLA - The very object of the PMLA is completely different from what the respondents (ED) are now attempting to do - The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the PMLA would show that the primary object for which the Act came into existence was for prevention of laundering of proceeds of drug crimes committed by global criminals/terrorists, involved in illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances - The more and more the Act is used for tackling normal offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code, committed within the territories of India, the result would be disastrous to the victims of crime - Therefore, Sections 5, 8 and 9 cannot be used by the respondents to inflict injury upon the victims of the crime - the provisional order of attachment as well as all the order of confirmation are set aside as illegal. </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 transfer of shares at cost by Indian subsidiary to non-resident parent as part of group restructuring scheme can be construed as bogus transaction: NO: ITAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> issues before the Bench are - Whether Service tax paid in pursuance of a show cause notice can be disallowed on the ground that the liability has not crystallized; Whether the cost of acquisition accepted in previous years is to be re-computed on account of high premium paid to associated enterprise and whether transfer of shares at cost by the Indian subsidiary to its non-resident parent as part of a group re-structuring scheme can be construed as a bogus transaction. </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">Appeal against revision orders passed by Commissioner after 19.8.2009 - Appealable to Tribunal: CESTAT</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> issue to be decided in this batch of cases is whether this Appellate Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with the appeals, all of which are directed against revisionary orders passed after 19.8.2009 by Commissioners of Central Excise under the erstwhile Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994.</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><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Day</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>