TIOL-DDT 2005 · 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 2005</font><br>
18.12.2012<br>
Tuesday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Appeals to Supreme Court - <em>Dilli Door Hai </em></font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>A</strong> recent study has revealed that most of the appeals that come to the Supreme Court are from the Delhi High Court, and High Courts of Punjab & Haryana - simply because of their proximity to Delhi. Very few cases came from Assam, Orissa J&K, and Sikkim. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Apart from geographical proximity, it was found that more appeals came from the richer States than the poorer ones. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The study also found that the Indian Supreme Court has become primarily a Court of Appeals. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court is not meant to be another appellate Court. </font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty on Vitrified Porcelain Tiles </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ANTI</strong> Dumping Duty on import of Vitrified Porcelain Tiles originating in, or exported from the People's Republic of China (China PR) and United Arab Emirates, was provisionally imposed vide Notification No. 50/2002-Cus dated 02.05.2002. This Notification was valid till 01.11.2002. But by Notification No. 73/2003-Cus dated 01.05.2003, definitive anti dumping duty was imposed, but with effect from the date of provisional anti dumping duty, that is 02.05.2002. This notification also expired on 02.05.2007. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government again freshly imposed the anti dumping duty on the product with effect from 27.06.2008 by Notification No. 82/2008 - Cus dated 27.06.2008.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Was there no dumping between 02.05.2007 and 26.06.2008? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">M/s. Jiangxi Zhengda Ceramics Co. Ltd, China PR (producer) through M/s Foshan Z&D Ceramics Co. Ltd., China PR (exporter) had requested for review of the anti dumping duty and the Government, on the recommendation of the Designated Authority ordered by Notification No.41/2011 - Cus dated 23.05.2011, that pending the outcome of the said review by the designated authority, export of Vitrified Porcelain Tiles by M/s. Jiangxi Zhengda Ceramics Co. Ltd., China PR (producer) through M/s Foshan Z&D Ceramics Co. Ltd., China PR (exporter) when imported into India, shall be subjected to provisional assessment till the review is completed. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the Designated Authority has recommended that no anti-dumping duty be imposed or levied on imports of vitrified porcelain tiles falling under chapter 69 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act 1975 produced by M/s. Jiangxi Zhengda Ceramics Co. Ltd, China PR (producer), and supplied to M/s Foshan Z&D Ceramics Ltd, China PR (Exporter) and subsequently exported to India by it. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Government, has therefore, amended Notification No. 82/2008-Cus dated 27.06.2008, to insert a fourth proviso: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Provided also that no anti-dumping duty shall be imposed on the imports into India of the subject goods produced by M/s. Jiangxi Zhengda Ceramics Co. Ltd.-China PR, and exported by M/s Foshan Z&D Ceramics Ltd.- China PR." </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And consequently, Notification No. 41/2011 - Cus dated 23.05.2011 is rescinded. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariffadd12_053.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 53/2012-Cus(ADD), Dated: December 14, 2012</a> and </strong></font><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariffadd12_054.htm" target="_blank">Notification No. 54/2012-Cus(ADD), Dated: December 14, 2012</a></font></strong></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty on Sodium Hydrosulphite - Long Story of Resurrection, Death and Rebirth</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>PROVISIONAL </strong>anti dumping Duty was imposed on the import of Sodium Hydrosulphite originating in, or exported from the People's Republic of China by Notification No. 28/2001-Customs, dated: March 12, 2001. This Notification lapsed on 11.09.2001. But as far as the Board is concerned, notifications simply don't lapse; they can be resurrected. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Notification No. 114/2001-Cus., dated 2-11-2001, the duty was again imposed, of course, with effect from the date of provisional imposition that is 12.03.2001. So, this would have expired on 11.3.2006. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Notification No. 25/2006-Cus., dated 10-3-2006, this notification was extended till the 11th day of March, 2007. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Notification No. 108/2006-Cus., dated 16-10-2006, the duty was re-imposed for another five years. (On Sunset Review) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Notification No. 133/2009-Cus., dated 09-12-2009, the duty was re-imposed to be in force up to 15.10.2011. (On Mid-term review)So, this expired on 15.10.2011. But anti dumping notifications don't expire as notified; they have many rebirths. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By Notification No. 111/2011-Cus dated 20.12.2011, the Government extended the validity of the notification till 13th October 2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, they have re-imposed the anti dumping duty for another five years but with effect from 14.12.2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Was there no dumping between 14.10.2012 to 13.12.2012? Board alone knows! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariffadd12_055.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 55/2012-Customs (ADD), Dated: December 14, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty on Cable Ties - Re-imposed </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> Anti Dumping Duty on Cable Ties falling under the sub-heading 3926 90, originating in, or exported from, the People's Republic of China and Taiwan was imposed by Notification No. 44/2009-Cus dated 30.4.2009 with effect from 31.10.2008 and would have been in force till 30.10.2013. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Designated Authority has recommended modification of the existing anti-dumping duty.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, the Government has superseded Notification No. 44/2009 and has imposed fresh anti dumping duty on the product with effect from 14.12.2012, but this will remain valid only till the validity of the original notification that is 30.10.2013. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariffadd12_056.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 56/2012-Customs (ADD), Dated: December 14, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">FTP - Two Agencies Notified for Issuing Certificate of Origin </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> DGFT has authorised Centre for Development of Stones (CDOS), Jaipur and All India Chamber of Commerce & Industries, Tuticorin to issue Certificate of Origin - Non Preferential. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span"><strong><font color="#0000FF">Certificate of Origin (CoO)</font></strong> <font color="#0000FF">is an instrument to establish evidence on origin of goods imported into any country.</font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#0000FF" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">There are two categories of CoO viz. </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font color="#0000FF" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">(i) Preferential and </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#0000FF" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">(ii) Non preferential </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font color="#0000FF" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">Preferential arrangement/schemes under which India is receiving tariff preferences for its exports are Generalised System of Preferences (GSP), Global System of Trade Preferences (GSTP), SAARC Preferential Trading Agreement (SAPTA), Asia-Pacific Trade Agreement (APTA), India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ISLFTA) and Indo Thailand Free Trade Agreement. These arrangements / agreements prescribe Rules of Origin which have to be met for exports to be eligible for tariff preference. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#0000FF" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">Authorised agencies shall provide services relating to issue of CoO, including details regarding rules of origin, list of items covered by an agreement, extent of tariff preference, verification and certification of eligibility. Export Inspection Council (EIC) is the agency authorised to print blank certificates</font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">. </font></p>
<p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=47&filename=notification/dgft/2012/dgft12pn037.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT Public Notice No. 37 (RE 2012)/2009-2014., Dated: December 17, 2012 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service Tax - Axis Bank Appeal Dismissed by CESTAT for Non Compliance </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> short facts were that the applicant had availed the services of Non-Resident service providers, who did not have offices in India and they had paid certain fees/charges to such non-resident service providers for facilitating issue of Global Depository Shares (GDS). Revenue took a view that the service is taxable and classifiable under the category of Banking and Other Financial Services as Merchant Banking Services and the person liable for payment of service tax is the person receiving the taxable service in India. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Show Cause Notice demanding Service Tax of Rs.1.67 Crores dt. 13.1.2009 was confirmed by the CST, Mumbai-I along with equivalent penalty and interest. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The CESTAT had while deciding the Stay petition adverted to the decision in <font color="#663399"><em>Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd.</em></font><strong> <font size="1"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=44&filename=legal/cestat/2012/2012-TIOL-199-CESTAT-DEL.htm" target="_blank">(2012-TIOL-199-CESTAT-DEL)</a></font></strong> and directed the applicant <font color="#663399"><em>to deposit an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only) within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 3 rd December, 2012." </em></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We had reported this case on 30th October 2012. <strong>(<font size="1"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=44&filename=legal/cestat/2012/2012-TIOL-1513-CESTAT-MUM.htm" target="_blank">2012-TIOL-1513-CESTAT-MUM</a></font>)</strong>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The
case was called for hearing on 3rd December, 2012 by the CESTAT, WZB at Mumbai
<strong>(</strong></font><strong><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=44&filename=legal/cestat/2012/2012-TIOL-1878-CESTAT-MUM.htm">2012-TIOL-1878-CESTAT-MUM</a></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">)</font></strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Since there was no compliance reported by the appellant, the Bench <strong>dismissed</strong> the appeal. </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">Central Excise</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CENVAT credit - Services utilized for erection and installation of Ammonia Storage Tank at port - Rule 4(7) of CCR, 2004 is to be read with definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules - input services used in relation to storage of inputs outside factory will not be eligible for credit - Demand of Rs.2.78 Crores upheld and appeal dismissed: CESTAT</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>INCLUSIVE</strong> definition of input service also includes input services used in relation to storage upto the place or removal. Storage upto place of removal will include the storage of final products and not storage of inputs because whenever legislature wanted to give the benefit, in respect of inputs it has done so by specifically mentioning as procurement of inputs and inward transportation of the inputs. Therefore, input services used in relation to storage of inputs outside the factory will not be eligible for the credit. </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 when assessee is engaged in business of manufacturing fuel briquettes from bagasse, waste of sugar industry, merely because assessee pays for purchase of such waste, it loses entitlement to benefits u/s 80JJA - NO: HC </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ASSESSEE</strong>, an individual, is engaged in the business of manufacturing fuel briquettes from bagasse. It had filed its ROI after claiming deduction u/s 80JJA. During assessment, AO disallowed the claim for deduction u/s 88JJA on the ground that bagasse was not a waste; it was not generated in municipal/urban limits i.e. by local authorities; it was not collected but it was purchased and the process of its manufacture had not involved any treatment or recycling of a biodegradable waste. On appeal, CIT(A) allowed the respondent's appeal. It was held in the order for both the AYs, that bagasse was purchased from sugar factories and processed by it for making briquettes to be used as fuel. Further it was held that all the conditions laid down in Section 80JJA were satisfied and the assessee was entitled to claim a deduction thereunder. On further appeal by the Revenue, Tribunal held that bagasse generated in the sugar industry was a waste and merely because it was purchased for a price, it did not cease to be a waste. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Scope of Appeal - CESTAT decision regarding Rate of Duty - Appeal against it has to be filed before Supreme Court under Section 130 E of the Customs Act, 1962: HC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ALTERNATIVE</strong> Remedy - CESTAT decision regarding Rate of Duty - Against it appeal lies to Supreme Court under Section 130 E of the Customs Act, 1962 and that remedy must be exhausted first - Followed the decision of Apex Court in the case of <em>Guwahati Carbon Ltd.</em> <strong><font size="1">(<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=26&filename=legal/sc/2012/2012-TIOL-119-SC-CUS.htm">2012-TIOL-119-SC-CUS</a>)</font></strong> - Writ petition against the Decision of CESTAT before High Court is not maintainable irrespective of vast powers of High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. </font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements</font></strong></p>
<p><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>