TIOL-DDT 2015 · 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 color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 2015</font><br> 02.01.2013 <br> Wednesday </strong></font></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">The Horror Begins - CBEC's New Year Bomb-</font></strong></font><font color="#006600"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If Stay Application is Pending, Pay up Confirmed Amounts</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>WE</strong> never imagined our Tax horror-scope would be a reality in less than 24 hours. (Please see yesterday's<strong> DDT</strong>) CBEC has issued its first Central Excise Circular on arrears recovery during pendency of Stay applications. The circular has rescinded seven previous circulars on the subject matter. Suddenly, the Board has noticed a Supreme Court judgement delivered in 1993 in case of <em>Krishna Sales (P) Ltd</em> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=26&filename=legal/sc/2002/2002-TIOL-428-SC-CUS.htm"><strong><font size="1">2002-TIOL-428-SC-CUS</font></strong> </a>wherein the Court observed that "As is well known, mere filing of an Appeal does not operate as a stay or suspension of the Order appealed against”. So, the Board has come to a conclusion that their predecessor Chairmen/Members did not know how to read Court Judgements and had issued some useless Circulars, which are now rescinded.Now, a fresh circular on how to deal with demands against which stay applications are pending before the Appellate forums, is issued. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">According to the latest Circular, if a stay application is filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) and CESTAT and if there is no stay within 30 days, recovery action has to be initiated. In case of stay applications before High Courts and Supreme Court, even this 30 days time is not available. Recovery has to be initiated immediately after the orders if there is no stay. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Perhaps the Board is not aware that there was no Bench sitting in Bangalore and Chennai CESTAT for the last several months and even now, the Bench is functional only for half of the month. How can they expect the CESTAT to dispose of all the stay petitions within 30 days? There are many places where the Commissioner (Appeals) posts are lying vacant. How can they expect the assessees to get stay within 30 days? Perhaps the Board is under the impression that stay orders are just like a ready-to-eat dish which the assessee should go, pick up and come back. All that the assessees can do is only file a Stay Petition and wait for the hearing notice. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Circular issued by the Board lacks foresight, proper understanding of the real situation and shows utter lack of respect for established procedure and the judicial system in the country. This Circular will no doubt create lot of work for the High Courts, as many Writ Petitions will be filed against this atrocious Circular. Perhaps the High Courts should award costs on the Board for issuing such mindless directions without understanding how not to apply the Supreme Court decision of 1993 to the present situation. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">When the Board has shown extreme obedience to the Supreme Court order in case of Krishna Sales (P) Ltd , why do they have total disregard to this observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in <em>Kumar Cotton Mills</em> case, which is more recent compared to the 1993 order? <font size="1"><strong>(<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=26&filename=legal/sc/2005/2005-TIOL-42-SC-CESTAT.htm">2005-TIOL-42-SC-CESTAT</a>)</strong></font>. Is it because it just does not suit you? How can they have only selective respect for the Supreme Court judgements? Their Lordships in Kumar Cotton Mills observed that:</font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The sub-section which was introduced in terrorem cannot be construed as punishing the assessees for matters which may be completely beyond their control.<u><strong> For example, many of the Tribunals are not constituted and it is not possible for such Tribunals to dispose of matters.</strong></u> Occasionally by reason of other administrative exigencies for which the assessee cannot be held liable, the stay applications are not disposed within the time specified.</font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Certainly, this is not the way to treat the goose that lays golden eggs for the department. They don't fill the Commissioner (Appeals) post, they don't post Members in Tribunal and they want to punish the assessees for the fault of babus! Is it the job of the assessees to fill the vacancies in CESTAT, post the Commissioner (Appeals)? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The situation in case of appeals filed in High Court / Supreme Court is worse. The orders passed by the lower authorities will be implemented immediately if there is no stay in operation. Does the Board expect the High Courts and Supreme Court to dispose of the Stay applications immediately, as directed by the Hon'ble CBEC? Are they aware of the level of pendency in these courts? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Before causing damage to the industry and embarrassment to itself, the Board should immediately do proper introspection and withdraw this draconian Circular. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2013/excircular967.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No. 967/01/2013-CX, Dated: January 01 2013 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Krishna Sales was against Revenue - First Hang; then Wait for Appellate Order </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> celebrated <em>Krishna Sales</em> case, which the Board relies on to justify the above draconian circular, was actually against the Revenue. In that case, the Customs Authorities refused to release the goods in spite of the importer winning in the Tribunal on the ground that the Department has appealed against the decision of the Tribunal. In such a circumstance, the Supreme Court observed, <em>"<font color="#FF0000">If the authorities are of the opinion that the goods ought not to be released pending the Appeal, the straight-forward course for them is to obtain an Order of Stay or other appropriate direction from the Tribunal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be. Without obtaining such an Order, they cannot refuse to implement the Order under Appeal. As is well-known, mere filing of an Appeal does not operate as a Stay or suspension of the Order appealed against.</font>"</em> </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board wants to use these adverse comments against it to harass the assessees now. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Suppose somebody is given the sentence of hanging by a High Court and he appeals to the Supreme Court. Will the Government hang him before the Supreme Court can grant a stay? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Or if somebody who is in jail is acquitted by a High Court, will the Government continue to keep him in jail because the Government has gone in appeal? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">You may say revenue cases cannot be compared to imprisonment and death sentence. No, they cannot be compared - this is even worse. If you kill a man (legally after a death sentence), you kill an individual and may be you inflict misery on his near ones, but if you kill an industry, you kill a society and you leave marks of your fiscal cruelty for years. That is exactly what is going to happen if the Board is serious about the Circular. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>What is going to happen?</strong> For Show Cause Notices where the demand is less than Rs. 50 lakhs, Assistant/Deputy Commissioners, Jt/Addl Commissioners will routinely confirm the demands even if the law, Board Circulars and Supreme Court judgements are in favour of the assessee. The assessee files a stay petition before the Commissioner (Appeals) who will order pre-deposit of the entire duty. If you cannot pay this, he will dismiss the appeal. Before you can say CESTAT, the officers of the Department will swarm your place with attachment orders threatening to sell your properties. If you pay 50 lakhs, you are doomed. If you don't pay 50 lakhs, you are still doomed. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If the demand is for more than Rs.50 lakhs, it can be anything running into hundreds of crores, the Commissioners also confirm the demands, because they are afraid to drop demands running into Crores. The demands can be atrocious, illegal and outright perverse - but a Commissioner's order is to be obeyed. You can never get a stay from CESTAT within 30 days and the department wants its illegitimate money. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">These are not hypothetical situations. Do you remember Customs issued notices to DTA suppliers of SEZ units demanding export duty for goods supplied to SEZs and Excise issued notices to the same assessees denying CENVAT credit on the same clearances? Even now, some notices are being issued. The procedure is simple. Audit raises an objection, department issues a notice, notice is confirmed, appellate authorities are not functioning and you are forced to pay up huge amounts. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">You can certainly enforce your demands and protect revenue - if you can make your adjudicators write fair, reasonable or at least legally valid orders. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">These measures don't seem to be to collect revenue - they are meant to harass the trade and maybe ultimately get them to close down business. You can't do more harm to Revenue than this. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">There seems to be a strong message for future. You must manage your case appropriately at the very first stage of adjudication. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DDT's HORRORSCOPE was not for humour - the horror is here and now - Happy New Year! </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">PS: In a recent judgement delivered a few days ago, the AP High Court directed the Revenue not to initiate or pursue any coercive steps against the petitioner (or others who owe dues to the petitioner) under Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1994 or any other appropriate provision, till disposal of the petitioner's applications for condonation of delay and for grant of interim relief in the appeal preferred by the petitioner to the Tribunal on 26-9-2012. <strong>(<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=43&filename=legal/hc/2013/2013-TIOL-09-HC-AP-ST.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2013-TIOL-09-HC-AP-ST</font></a>)</strong></font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Classification of Cordless Infrared Devices for Remote Control - Board Clarifies </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BOARD</strong> is of the considered view that: </font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(a) When cordless infrared devices for the remote control are presented in a set put up for retail sale, that is, they are put up in a manner suitable for sale directly to users without repacking, along with principal / main device with which they are to be used, they shall be classified along with the principal / main device by application of GRI 3(b) and 6. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(b) In cases where cordless infrared devices for the remote control are presented separately, they shall be classified under heading 8543, sub-heading 8543.70, by application of GRI 1 and 6 </font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Accordingly, Board wants all pending assessments, if any, to be finalized and suitable instructions to be given to the field formations. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2013/cuscir13_001.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No.01/2013-Cus, Dated: January 01, 2013 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Replacement of Fixed Deposit Receipts (FDRs) furnished in respect of provisional Mega or Ultra Mega Power Projects with Bank Guarantees (BGs) - CBEC Clarification</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NOTIFICATION</strong> Nos. 12/2012-Customs (S.No.507) and 12/2012-Central Excise (S.No. 337 and 338), both dated 17-03-2012, granted exemption from customs and excise duties for provisional mega and ultra-mega power projects. One of the conditions specified for availing of the said exemption is that the importer/project developer furnishes a security in the form of a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) or Bank Guarantee from a Scheduled Bank for a term of 36 months or more for an amount equal to the duty payable but for this exemption. This condition was amended w.e.f 27-06-2012 when the importer/ project developer was given the option of furnishing either FDR or Bank Guarantee from a Scheduled Bank. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the Board clarifies that since FDR and Bank Guarantee are considered equally effective securities, there should not be any difficulty in allowing the importer/ project developer to replace the FDR with the Bank Guarantee. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2013/cuscir13_002.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No.02/2013-Cus, Dated: January 01, 2013 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Installation of Close Circuit Television Systems (CCTV) </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BOARD </strong>has decided that Commissioner of Customs, at the time of notification/Order under Section 8 of the Customs Act, 1962 for specifying Customs area for loading and unloading of imported or export goods and appointment of Custodian under Section 45 of the Customs Act, 1962, should ensure that video cameras and CCTVs Systems are installed in the Customs Area for security and to prohibit unauthorised access to the premises. The video footage should be available to Customs, which shall regularly monitor the same. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But will the Customs officers like their activities to be monitored by CCTVs? </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This Circular is actually 3/2013, but Board has by mistake numbered it as 03/2012 - it happens during the New Year! </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2013/cuscir13_003.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No.03/2013-Cus, Dated: January 01, 2013 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Insurance Premium - Service Tax on Reminders?? </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IT</strong> has been represented by life insurance companies that in terms of the practice followed, reminder notices/letters are being issued to the policyholders to pay renewal premiums. Such reminder notices only solicit furtherance of service which if accepted by policy holder by payment of premium results in a service. Clarification has been desired whether service tax needs to be paid on the basis of such reminders. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board clarifies that reminder letters/notices for insurance policies not being invoices would not invite levy of service tax. In case of issuance of any invoice, point of taxation shall accordingly be determined. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Some bright officer must have asked the insurance companies to pay Service Tax based on these reminders!. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=41&filename=notification/servicetax/2012/sercir166.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No.166/1/2013 -ST, Dated: January 01, 2013 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service Tax - Foodstuff Includes Milk - Transportation by Rail Exempted</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>REPRESENTATION</strong> has been received from the Indian Railways seeking clarification as to whether service by way of transportation of milk by rail is covered by Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, serial number 20(i). Board clarifies: </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The expression<em> 'foodstuff' appearing in Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, serial number 20(i) includes milk. Therefore, the service by way of transportation of milk by rail or a vessel from one place in India to another is covered by the Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. </em></font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=41&filename=notification/servicetax/2012/sercir167.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC Circular No.167/2/2013 -ST, Dated: January 01, 2013 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Exemption for Import of Crude from Brunei Darussalam </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has exempted Crude Petroleum oils and oils obtained from bituminous minerals falling under the tariff item 2709 00 00, when imported into India from Brunei Darussalam, from whole of the duty of customs. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Earlier the duty was 1% by Notification No. 116/2010-Cus dated 1.11.2010, which is superseded. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariff12_063.htm"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.63/2012-Cus, Dated: December 31, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Imports from ASEAN Countries - Rates Reduced </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>NOTIFICATION</strong> No. 46/2011-Cus dated 1st June 2011 grants concessional rates of duty for imports from nine ASEAN Countries and a separate set of rates for imports from Philippines. This notification is amended and the rates are reduced. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariff12_064.htm"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.64/2012-Cus, Dated: December 31, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Imports from Japan - Duty Reduced </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has reduced the Customs duty on imports of engines of cylinder capacity exceeding 250cc(8408 2020) and Gearboxes and parts (870840). Sl. Nos 521 and 746 of Notification No. 69/2011-Cus dated 29.07.2011 are amended. </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariff12_065.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.65/2012-Cus, Dated: December 31, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Imports from Korea - Duty Reduced </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Government</strong> has reduced the Customs duty on imports from the Republic of Korea as notified under Notification No. 152/2009-Cus dated 31.12.2009 </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariff12_066.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.66/2012-Cus, Dated: December 31, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Imports from Malaysia - Duty Reduced </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has reduced the Customs duty on imports from Malaysia as notified under Notification No. 53/2011-Cus dated 01.07.2011 </font></p> <p><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariff12_067.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.67/2012-Cus, Dated: December 31, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs - Imports from Pakistan and Sri Lanka - Duty Reduced </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has reduced the Customs duty on imports from Pakistan and Sri Lanka by issue of a new notification. Notification No. 125/2011-Cus dated 30.12.2011, is superseded. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2012/ctariff12_068.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.68/2012-Cus, Dated: December 31, 2012 </font></strong></a></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export of Goods and Services - Simplification and Revision of Softex Procedure at SEZs</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AS</strong> per Regulation 6 of the Notification No. FEMA 23/2000-RB dated May 3, 2000 viz. Foreign Exchange Management (Export of Goods and Services) Regulations, 2000, designated officials of the Ministry of Information Technology/ Ministry of Commerce and Industry(as the case may be), Government of India at the Software Technology Parks of India (STPIs) or at Free Trade Zones (FTZs) or Export Processing Zones (EPZs) or Special Economic Zones (SEZs), had been authorized to certify exports declared through SOFTEX Forms. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A revised Softex procedure was first introduced at the 5 designated centres of STPIs from April 1, 2012 and subsequently extended to all STPIs in India. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">RBI has now decided to implement the revised Softex procedure at all SEZs/EPZs/100%EOU/DTA also with immediate effect. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per the revised procedure, a software exporter either under STPIs or SEZs/EPZs/100%EOU/DTA, whose annual turnover is at least Rs.1000 crore or who files at least 600 SOFTEX forms annually on all India basis, will be eligible to submit statements in revised excel format sheets as per Annexures A & B. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2012/rbi12cir066.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">AP (DIR Series) Circular No.66/RBI, Dated: January 01, 2013 </font></strong></a></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">Central Excise</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Stay - Pre-deposit - Commissioner (Appeals) to show that he has at least prima facie considered the submissions of parties: HC</font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>AT</strong> the time of disposing of the stay application, the Commissioner (Appeals) is not required to consider all the submissions made by the parties in depth. However, as he would be exercising a quasi-judicial function while directing the petitioner to deposit or not deposit any amount for the purposes of entertaining the petitioner's appeal on merit, the same is required to be exercised by showing that he has at least prima facie considered the submissions of the parties before him. Merely because the petitioner has not pleaded any financial hardship, it would not follow that the amount of duty and/or penalty adjudicated by the lower authority has to be pre-deposited for the purposes of hearing of the appeal on merits. A strong prima facie case may at times constitute sufficient reason for dispensing with pre-deposit of any amount for the purposes of entertaining the appeal on merits. An illustration of such a case would be where the dispute is covered in favour of the party by a decision of a higher forum. </font></p> <p><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 assessees reimburse costs to a third party for manufacturing steel in pre-determined ratio, such payments are to be treated as FTS, liable to withholding tax - 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 when the assessees reimburse the costs to a third party for manufacturing steel in a pre-determined ratio, such payments are to be treated as FTS, liable to withholding tax and Whether the costs reimbursements made by the assesses has an element of income. And the verdict goes against the Revenue. </font></p> <p><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">Import of printed items relating to textile colour designing/matching - Merely because textile material occupies more space it cannot be stated that they are not books: CESTAT </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>OBVIOUSLY</strong>, a textile material cannot be printed on a paper and has to be pasted. Further, below every textile chip the colour name and code is printed. Merely because the textile material occupies more space, it cannot be stated that they are not books. For example, in a book containing many photographs, the photograph may occupy more space than the printed matter. That does not mean that it is a photo album and not a book. </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 align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Babus were too active on the first day of the New Year and that explains this longish <strong>DDT</strong>. </font></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 align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a Nice Day </font></p> <p align="justify"><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>