TIOL-DDT 1964 · 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 1964</font><br> 17.10.2012<br> Wednesday</strong></font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Systematic corruption is a human rights' violation in itself - Central Excise Superintendent loses in Supreme Court </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ON</strong> 8.1.1999, a Special Case was registered against the then Superintendent of Central Excise, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(e) of the PC Act 1988, alleging that he possessed assets disproportionate to his disclosed source of income which was to the extent of Rs. 7,64,368/- </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The trial court concluded the trial and convicted the Superintendent and awarded him a sentence of two years, along with a fine of Rs.1lakh and, in default, to undergo imprisonment for a further period of three months, vide judgment and order dated 15.10.2007. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Subsequent to his conviction, the Superintendent was put under suspension by the competent authority vide order dated 1.11.2007 and was served a show-cause notice dated 25.1.2008, to explain that in view of his conviction for the offence punishable, why he should not be dismissed from service, in view of the provisions of Rule 11 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Superintendent approached the High Court requesting that during the pendency of his appeal against the said impugned judgment, the order of conviction against him be suspended. The said application of suspension of conviction has been allowed vide impugned order dated 8.4.2008. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The CBI took the matter in appeal to the Supreme Court. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court observed that, "<em>the Appellate Court in an exceptional case, may put the conviction in abeyance along with the sentence, but such power must be exercised with great circumspection and caution, for the purpose of which, the applicant must satisfy the Court as regards the evil that is likely to befall him, if the said conviction is not suspended. The Court has to consider all the facts as are pleaded by the applicant, in a judicious manner and examine whether the facts and circumstances involved in the case are such, that they warrant such a course of action by it. The court additionally, must record in writing, its reasons for granting such relief. Relief of staying the order of conviction cannot be granted only on the ground that an employee may lose his job, if the same is not done</em>." </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The High Court had held, "<em>As the applicant would suffer serious prejudice on account of order of dismissal, the applicant is justified in applying to this Court for suspending the order of conviction so that the Department shall not precipitate the matter further</em>." </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court was not impressed and observed, "<em>Corruption is not only a punishable offence but also undermines human rights, indirectly violating them, and systematic corruption, is a human rights' violation in itself, as it leads to systematic economic crimes. Thus, in the aforesaid backdrop, the High Court should not have passed the said order of suspension of sentence in a case involving corruption. It was certainly not the case where damage if done, could not be undone as the employee/respondent if ultimately succeeds, could claim all consequential benefits</em>." </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, the High Court order is set aside. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This means: </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. If a Government servant is convicted in a corruption case, his conviction will not be suspended just because he would lose his job. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. If he is convicted, he would lose his job. Not suspension, but dismissal. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. He can get his job back if he ultimately succeeds - twenty years later. </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Is corruption worth the risk? And these are days not very favourable to the corrupt - the ones who are caught that is. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We bring you this Supreme Court order today. Please see </font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=50&filename=legal/sc/2012/2012-TIOL-100-SC-MISC.htm" target="_blank">2012-TIOL-100-SC-MISC</a></strong></font> </p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">FTP - Import of Arms for Sports</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>UNDER</strong> the existing Policy Conditions, import of arms (including parts thereof) & ammunition is permitted freely, inter alia, to National Rifle Association of India (NRAI) for its own use and for transfer to its State/district affiliates by due certification by Sports Authority of India. The phrase "due certification by Sports Authority of India" has been substituted by "self certification by NRAI". </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2012/dgft12not023.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT Notification No. 23(RE-2012)/2009-2014, Dated: October 16, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC to Promote Even Dismissed Officers! </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A </strong>Netizen was very angry with<strong> DDT <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=16094" target="_blank">(DDT 1962)</a></strong> for reporting that CBEC proposes to promote even retired Additional Commissioners as Commissioners. The Netizen was angry that DDT does not fully understand the capacity of the CBEC. The proposed promotion list not only contains the names of Additional Commissioners who have retired, but also contains names of officers who are dismissed from service and who have resigned from the <strong>service</strong>. And because the Appraisal Reports of the dismissed and resigned officers are not available, the promotion of the regular ones may be stuck. </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DDT<strong> regrets</strong> the lapse. </font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fugitive Income Tax Officer Nabbed </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=15893" target="_blank">DDT 1943 17 09 2012</a></strong>, it was reported, </font></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>KAKINADA</strong> is a small rich port town in Andhra Pradesh and here during the weekend the CBI trapped an Income Tax Officer demanding a bribe of Rs. 65 Lakhs! It seems the ITO demanded Rs. 80 Lakhs but later his uncle intervened and got the bribe amount reduced to Rs. 65 Lakhs. And it was the uncle who was caught red-handed by the CBI while accepting an amount of Rs. 15 lakhs. This uncle was arrested and will be produced before the CBI court today. The ITO was not arrested because of his "ill health" and hospitalisation. <strong>Eventually he will be! </strong></font></em></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, he is - exactly after a month.</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This ITO who was hospitalized escaped from the hospital on the day he was to be arrested. Since then, he was missing. But the CBI sleuths caught up with him and arrested him. Interestingly, he was arrested from another hospital. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This means: </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1. Taking bribe is always risky. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2. One can't really run away from the Police - they will catch up one day. </font></p> <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">3. The day one is caught, one is ruined - forever. </font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CAT - No more Contempt, Revenue Secretary </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=16064" target="_blank">DDT 1960 11 10 2012</a>, </strong>it was reported, </font></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Though Mr. RS Gujral is no more the Revenue Secretary, he is facing contempt charge in Supreme Court and a CAT Bench. The Mumbai Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal recently issued a bailable warrant against Gujral to secure his presence in the Tribunal in a case filed by a 79 year old former Deputy Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise who believes that he should have got a promotion while in service. In spite of a favourable order from CAT, his deemed promotion did not come and he filed a contempt petition in which the CAT asked the former Revenue Secretary (who is the present expenditure and Finance Secretary) Gujral to appear in person on October 3rd. When he failed to attend the Tribunal on that day, the CAT issued a warrant against him. </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yesterday, the Bombay High Court stayed the warrant. In the meantime, the Government considered the request of the former Deputy Commissioner of Customs and rejected his request, as he was held not eligible for the promotion. </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is how Government deals with litigation - litigation against Government is best avoided. </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Now, there is good news for the Revenue Secretary.</strong> The Retired Deputy Commissioner has withdrawn his contempt petition against the Revenue Secretary. </font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Quid Pro Quo </font></strong></p> <p align="center"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Quid pro quo - Origin 1555 - 65; Latin - literally, something for something. </font></em></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN </strong>May 1971, Ved Prakash Malhotra, Chief Cashier of State Bank of India, Parliament Street, New Delhi got a call from Indira Gandhi to give Rs. 60 Lakhs to a person who would come to collect it. Malhotra gave the cash and went to the PMO to collect a receipt from the Prime Minister. It was found that the caller was not Indira Gandhi but one Nagarwala who imitated her voice. But why would a cashier in SBI give money on a call from Indira Gandhi when she did not even have an account in the bank? The investigating officer Kashyap died in a car accident and Nagarwala who was caught and put in jail died in jail. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Was there any quid pro quo? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In 1986, Government of India bought guns worth about Rs. 1500 Crores from Bofors. Some middlemen knocked off some Rs. 64 Crores in the deal. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But there was no quid pro quo? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Young enterprising businessmen of the 21st Century are making a few thousands of crores out of thin air by investing in real estate. (Can it be real?) . Is there a quid pro quo - just because they are closely related to some important politicians? </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"> - Thursday'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">Customs </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CHALR - Department directed to issue licence to petitioner who passed 1984 Regulations Examination: HC </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> issue raised by the Petitioner is whether he should take the CHA examination again under CHA Regulations 2004, when he has passed the examination conducted under Regulation 9 of the earlier Regulations of 1984. According to the Petitioner, a candidate upon passing the examination held under the 1984 Regulations, need not write the examination again. </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 in case of demerger, demerged company cannot claim Sec 10A benefits for income of financial year in which demerger takes place - YES: 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 the assessee, a demerged company is entitled to deduction u/s 10A, in respect of the profit as declared in its return of income till the date of demerger - Whether in view of section 10A(7A), only the resulting company will be entitled for deduction u/s 10A and the demerged company will not be allowed any deduction for the income offered for the financial year in which the demerger took place. And the verdict partly goes in favour of Revenue. </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Excise </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Range Superintendent is not empowered to quantify duty demand - CESTAT</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> the normal course, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have required the original authority (Additional Commissioner) to quantify the revised demand. In this case, however, this did not happen. The Range Superintendent appears to have, on his own accord, done the exercise of re-quantification of duty. The aforesaid letter was issued to demand such duty. After considering all aspects of this case, the demand worked out by the Superintendent without concurrence of the original authority should not be enforced during the pendency of this appeal. </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>