Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Service Tax

Investigation report by Commissioner indicates that his office could not trace dispatch records for period December 2008 to January 2009 to prove that O-in-O dated 29.12.2008 was served - appellant's claim that they received order only in December, 2010 and filed appeal in March, 2011 before Commr (A) and which is in time as per statute has to be accepted - Matter remanded: CESTAT

THE appellant was served a Show Cause Notice dt. 11.04.2007 for non-discharge of Service Tax on ‘Air travel agent' services. The appellant did not file any reply to the SCN nor they did they appear for the personal hearing before the adjudicating authority. Having no other alternative the adjudicating authority passed an O-in-O dt.29.12.2008. The appeal against such order was filed by the appellant on 30.03.2011 claiming before first appellate authority that the O-in-O was received by them on 30.12.2010 vide Letter No.STC/04-05/Prev/Misc./07-08/Gr.IV/5286, dt.30.12.2010.

Holding that the appeal had been filed after almost two years and which delay could not be condoned, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the same and resultantly an appeal came to be filed before the CESTAT.

Income Tax

Whether when alleged undisclosed income is made subject matter of block assessment, it can be again subjected to regular assessment - NO: HC

THE issues before the Bench are - Whether once income has been assessed under the provisions of block assessment as per Chapter XIVB, and the income added was deleted on merits by the appellate authorities, whether AO can still proceed to reopen the assessment on the grounds that such income has escaped assessment; Whether when an alleged undisclosed income has been made a subject matter of block assessment, it can be again subject to regular assessment under chapter XIV of the Act and Whether when CIT(A) has ordered as per section 158BA(3) for exclusion of certain items from block assessment, the AO can use it as a license to reopen the assessment in respect of the very same items which were subject matter of the block assessment. And the verdict goes in favour of the assessee.

Central Excise

In case the job worker is wrongly availing benefit of notification, job worker is liable to pay duty and not supplier of raw material - Revenue and assessee Appeals dismissed : CESTAT

THE assessee is engaged in the manufacture of various Machineries and Bulkers falling under Chapter 84 & 87 of the CETA, 1985. The assessee is receiving duty paid bare chassis for the fabrication of bulkers. For fabrication of cabins, the duty paid bare chassis are sent to the job worker M/s. Commercial Engineers & Body Builders Co. Pvt. Ltd. and assessee are paying cabin making charges @ Rs.45,000/- per cabin. M/s. Commercial Engineers & Body Builders Co. Pvt. Ltd. are clearing the cabins to the assessee in terms of the exemption Notification No.5/98-CE dated 2.6.1998. Thereafter the assessee is fabricating bulkers and paying appropriate duty on the assessable value of the bulkers. Show cause notice was issued to add Rs.45,000/- in the assessable value of each bulker, which were paid for cabins. Revenue also wants to add 5% of the assessable value of the goods which is being charged by the assessee from M/s. ACC Ltd. as service charges in respect of procurement and co-ordination of services.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements