Jurisprudentiol - Monday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Manufacture of dutiable and exempted goods - Amendment of Section 2(d) of Central Excise Act, 1944 makes no difference - CESTAT sets aside demand of 10%-5% under Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 on Press Mud and Sludge

THE dispute is on the sustainability of demand of 10% - 5% on Press Mud and Sludge arsing during the course of manufacture of Sugar, Molasses etc in view of using common inputs and not maintaining separate accounts for inputs. The dispute attains importance as the department pressed into service the provisions of the amended Section 2(d) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 wherein an Explanation has been inserted with effect from 10.5.2008 as under:

Income Tax

Income tax - Whether when assessee claims expenses with respect to software development outsourced to another company and then exports the same, such expenses are eligible for deduction u/s 10B - YES: ITAT

THE issue before the Bench is - Whether when the assessee claims expenses on account of development of software outsourced to another company and then exports the same, such expenses are eligible for deduction u/s 10B. And the verdict goes in favour of the assessee.

FEMA

FERA - Foreign Remittance received in savings bank account during period of Remittances in Foreign (Immunities) Scheme, 1991 - Penalty for alleged contravention of Section 9(1)(f)(i) of FERA 1973 is not sustainable - High Court of Bombay

THE question before the High Court was: Whether the Tribunal was justified in affirming the imposition of penalty for the alleged contravention of Section 9(1)(f)(i) of FERA 1973 on the ground that the appellants had paid equivalent Indian currency through Mr. Niranjan Shah to a person outside India without any general or special exemption granted by the RBI as a consideration for acquisition of USD 1,00,000/-?

See our columns Mondayfor the judgements