TIOL-DDT 2032 · 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 2032 </font><br>
28.01.2013 <br>
Monday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGCEI Officers to face prosecution for assault of assessee - Is routine slap excessive?</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE </strong>charge against the DGCEI officers: It seems the DGCEI got information that a Director of an assessee company against whom summons were served was lodged in a hotel in Delhi's Paharganj. On 10th November 2009, the officers of DGCEI between 10 pm and 11 pm visited the hotel and forcefully took the assessee to their R K Puram office. Arrest was not shown immediately, but only on the next day. It was alleged that the assessee was kept under illegal custody and put to physical and mental torture. The medical examination recorded that he was beaten. CCTV footage of the hotel also incriminated the officers. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ACMM took cognizance of the case booked against the officers charging them with offences under the following Sections of the IPC </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">323 - Voluntarily causing grievous hurt, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">348 - Wrongful confinement to extort confession, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">365 - Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">368 - Wrongfully concealing or keeping in confinement, kidnapped or abducted person, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">506 - Criminal Intimidation </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">34 - Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">120-B - criminal conspiracy</font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span"> </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ACMM rejected the argument that the officers were entitled to a protection under Section 40 of Central Excise Act or a sanction would be necessary under Section 197 Cr. P.C. as he considered that the act of forcibly taking the petitioners from Hotel to R.K. Puram office and using force and confinement in R.K. Puram, without showing arrest, and causing injuries were not covered within the duties of the DGCEI officers. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The DGCEI officers approached the Delhi High Court to get the proceedings before the ACMM quashed. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The High Court was kind to quash the proceedings observing, “<em>Even if it is presumed that a slap was given, that cannot be considered use of excess force for arresting a person or for detaining a person. The action of the officers in taking the respondent from hotel to the office for inquiry and thereafter arresting him after the inquiry were within the scope of duties and the officers enjoyed protection of Section 40 of the Central Excise Act and it cannot be said that their act was not done in good faith merely on the complaint of the complainant and at the most they could be charged under Section 20 of Central Excise Act, by the Court where trial of excise case was going on</em>.” - <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=51&filename=legal/hc/2011/2011-TIOL-946-HC-DEL-MISC.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2011-TIOL-946-HC-DEL-MISC</font></a></strong> </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This should have been a happy conclusion for the DGCEI officers, but the assessee was not one to take things lying down and took the matter to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court recently held, <font color="#663300"><em>The High Court, though has noticed the number of injuries sustained by the Complainant, but on a very technical ground, has allowed the petition and set aside the entire proceedings. The High Court was not justified in passing the impugned judgment and order. Therefore, while allowing these appeals, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to complete the criminal proceedings as early as possible, at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court's order</em></font>. <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=50&filename=legal/sc/2013/2013-TIOL-11-SC-MISC.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2013-TIOL-11- SC-MISC </font></a></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, the matter is back in the court of the ACMM, where it all began in 2009 and the DGCEI officers face all the above provisions of the IPC. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I am not even remotely suggesting that the DGCEI officers were wrong. I know some righteous innocent officers who were made victims of false cases by smart assessees - but the fact is - the Law does not permit you to assault somebody whom you consider guilty and who is eligible for release on bail immediately on arrest.</font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mere non-payment of duties is NOT collusion or wilful misstatement or suppression of facts - SC</font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“<strong>WHEN</strong> can the extended period of five years be invoked in a Show Cause Notice for demand of duty?”, a Commissioner asked his officers in a meeting. “When the normal period of one year has expired”, was the unanimous reply. Normally the Show Cause Notices in Customs, Excise and Service Tax are issued to demand a duty for a period of five years routinely invoking the extended period for collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, with intent to evade payment of duty thrown in. I have seen Show Cause Notices alleging intention to evade duty of a few thousands by assessees paying crores of rupees as duty.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Though the Supreme Court had in a large number of cases held that mere failure to supply information or failure to pay duty would not amount to suppression, the Department and Tribunal often take the view that if duty was not paid, suppression can be invoked and limitation can be extended to five years. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In the case of Cosmic Dye Chemical v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay - <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=32&filename=legal/sc/2002/2002-TIOL-236-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2002- TIOL-236-SC-CX</font></a></strong>, Supreme Court held that intention to evade duty must be proved for invoking the proviso to section 11A (1) for extended period of limitation. It has been further held that intent to evade duty is built into the expression "fraud and collusion" but mis -statement and suppression is qualified by the preceding word " wilful ". Therefore, it is not correct to say that there can be suppression or misstatement of fact, which is not wilful and yet constitutes a permissible ground for invoking the proviso to section 11A . </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In case of Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company v. C.C.E <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=32&filename=legal/sc/2002/2002-TIOL-235-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2002-TIOL-235-SC-CX</font></a></strong>, the Supreme Court has held that the extended period of five years under the proviso to section 11A (1) is not applicable just for any omission on the part of the assessee , unless it is a deliberate attempt to escape from payment of duty. Where facts are known to both the parties, the omission by one to do what he might have done and not that he must have done does not constitute suppression of fact. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <em> Anand Nishikawa Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut -<strong> <font size="1"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=32&filename=legal/sc/2005/2005-TIOL-118-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank">2005- TIOL-118-SC-CX</a></font></strong>, the Supreme Court held, ‘In taxation, it ("suppression of facts") can have only one meaning that the correct information was not disclosed deliberately to escape payment of duty.' </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <em>Collector of Central Excise Vs. H.M.M. Ltd. - <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=32&filename=legal/sc/2002/2002-TIOL-120-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2002-TIOL-120-SC-CX</font></a></strong></em>, the Supreme Court held that mere non-disclosure of certain items assessable to duty does not tantamount to the mala fides elucidated in the proviso to Section 11A (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <em>Easland Combines, Coimbatore Vs. The Collector of Central Excise, Coimbatore - <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=32&filename=legal/sc/2003/2003-TIOL-26-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2003-TIOL-26-SC-CX</font></a></strong> the Supreme Court held: “It is settled law that for invoking the extended period of limitation duty should not have been paid, short levied or short paid or erroneously refunded because of either fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts or contravention of any provision or rules. This Court has held that these ingredients postulate a positive act and, therefore, mere failure to pay duty and/or take out a licence which is not due to any fraud, collusion or wilful misstatement or suppression of fact or contravention of any provision is not sufficient to attract the extended period of limitation.” </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In spite all these emphatic decisions, extended period of limitation is routinely confirmed. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court had an occasion to consider this issue again recently. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>If every demand is for suppression and collusion, what is ordinary demand?</strong> Wondered the Supreme Court - There is no ordinary demand Sir!. The Supreme Court observed, “<font color="#FF0000">The conclusion that mere non-payment of duties is equivalent to collusion or willful misstatement or suppression of facts is, in our opinion, untenable. If that were to be true, we fail to understand which form of non-payment would amount to ordinary default.” </font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court also observed, <font color="#FF0000">It is a cardinal postulate of law that the burden of proving any form of<em> mala fide</em> lies on the shoulders of the one alleging it. It cannot be overlooked that burden of establishing<em> mala fides</em> is very heavy on the person who alleges it. The allegations of mala fides are often more easily made than proved, and the very seriousness of such allegations demand proof of a high order of credibility. </font></font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We bring you this order today.<strong> Please see <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=16845" target="_blank">Breaking News </a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Import Duty on Edible Oils increased from Nil to 2.5% </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has imposed a Customs duty of 2.5% on edible oils, which attracted a nil rate of duty earlier. Duty on Crude palm oil, Crude Palmolein, Fractions of crude palm oil, Crude Soya-bean oil, Groundnut oil, Olive Oil, other oils, sunflower/cottonseed oil, coconut oil, mustard oil are covered in the hike. Notification No. 12/2012-Cus is amended. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The existing and revised rate of duty as per the notification is as given below: </font></p>
<table width="90%" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">S. No.</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chapter or Heading or sub-heading or tariff item</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Description of goods</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Standard rate </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><strong><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Revised Standard Rate </font></strong></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1) </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2) </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3)</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(4) </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(5) </font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">51 </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">15 </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">II. The following goods, of edible grade namely,- </font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5% </font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(A) Crude palm oil falling under heading 1511, having an acid value of 4 or more and total carotenoid (as beta carotene) in the range of 250 mg/kg. to 2500 mg/kg., in loose or bulk form for manufacture of refined oil, refined palmolein, vanaspati, bakery shortening or inter-esterified fats </font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5%</font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(B) Crude Palmolein falling under heading 1511, having an acid value of 4 or more and total carotenoid (as beta carotene) in the range of 500 mg/kg. to 2500 mg/kg., in loose or bulk form for manufacture of refined oil, refined palmolein, vanaspati, bakery shortening or inter-esterified fats </font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5%</font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(C) Fractions of crude palm oil (other than crude palmolein) falling under heading 1511, having an acid value of 2 or more and total carotenoid (as beta carotene) in the range of 500 mg/kg. to 2500 mg/kg., in loose or bulk form</font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5% </font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Explanation.-For the purposes of this entry, “Crude palm oil” means fixed vegetable oils, fluid or solid, obtained by pressure, if they have undergone no processing other than decantation, centrifugation or filtration, provided that, in order to separate the oils from solid particles only mechanical force, such as gravity, pressure or centrifugal force, has been employed, excluding any absorption filtering process, fractionalization or any other physical or chemical process. If obtained by extraction an oil shall continue to be considered as “crude”, provided it has undergone no change in colour, odour or taste when compared with corresponding oil obtained by pressure</font></td>
<td><div align="center"></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000"></font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">55.</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">15071000</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> All goods</font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5% </font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">57</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1508, 1509, 1510, 1512, 1513, 1514, or 1515</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">All goods, crude and edible grade </font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5%</font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">62 </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">15121110</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">All goods </font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil </font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5%</font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">65</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">1514 11 or 1514 91</font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">All goods, edible grade</font></td>
<td><div align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nil</font></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.5%</font></div></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2013/ctariff13_002.htm" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 02/2013 - Customs, Dated: January 23, 2013</font></strong></a></p>
<table width="90%" border="0" align="center" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td colspan="2"><div align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>International Customs Day 2013</strong></font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/Innovation.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="312" height="176" hspace="5" border="0" align="top"></strong></font></td>
<td><p align="justify"><em><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">INNOVATION</font></strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> is a key driver for sustainable Customs reform and modernization, not only ensuring that Customs remains on top of its game but also ensuring that Customs is in a strong position to meet the challenges and take advantage of the opportunities presented by the 21st century border and trade environment. Indeed, innovation is not just about designing or implementing something new, whether it is a new policy or new technology or a new way of doing business, it is also about continuing investment in all aspects of Customs' work, including its human capital, which is critical to ensure sustained progress and success. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>I am confident that our collective efforts to innovate even further during 2013 will lead to stronger economic competitiveness and generate more global growth which is supported by enhanced trade facilitation, a balanced risk-based approach to supply chain security, and a deepening commitment towards global compliance and good governance.</em> - Kunio Mikuriya, Secretary General, WCO </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">While the rest of the World celebrated Customs Day on 26 January, the Indian Customs is scheduled to celebrate it on 5 February 2013! Who will sacrifice a holiday in India? </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<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"> - Tuesday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p>
<p><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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">Service Tax</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Merely on ground that there is shortage of Inputs as per balance sheet, CENVAT credit on Input Service of Transportation cannot be sought to be denied - <em>Prima facie</em> case in favour - pre-deposit waived and stay granted: CESTAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THEY </strong>say the word Ingenuity should be synonymous to a Central Excise officer. He takes interpretation to great lengths and his imagination runs riot when coming out with something original!It is a common objection when it comes to proposing denial of CENVAT credit on "Inputs" short received and more often than not, it is sustained by the appellate authorities. </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="#FF6600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whether assessment can be reopened u/s 147 even if AO had prior information about alleged accommodation entries provided to assessee and AO had also issued notice u/s 133(6) before completing assessment order - NO: HC </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> assessee's income was assessed u/s 143(3) and completed on 30.12.2009. In the year 2011, a notice u/s 148 was issued for reopening assessment. In the reasons recorded, the AO mentioned that he received information from investigation wing, New Delhi that a Search and seizure operation u/s 132, was conducted at the office premises of Sh. Tarun Goyal, Chartered Accountant on 15.09.2008. From the statement of Sh. Tarun Goyal it was established that he had floated about 90 companies, including the assessee company, for the purpose of providing accommodation entries, which were not carrying out any genuine activity and were merely being used to provide accommodation entries. The AO recorded in the reasons that the assessee had introduced his own money in the grab of share application money/share capital/unsecured loan/gift/expenses/purchase of shares through the above mentioned companies during the period under consideration. It was further recorded in the reasons that the above information was neither available with the department nor did the assessee disclosed the same at the time of the assessment proceedings. Therefore, AO was of the opinion that the assessee had deliberately furnished wrong facts at the time of filing of return and had concealed true particulars of its income.</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">On and from 17.02.2011 there is no requirement for obtaining clearance from Committee on Disputes - therefore, as law declared by Supreme Court stood on 18.02.2011, Tribunal was not correct in dismissing revenue's appeal - by allowing revenue's ROA Application by reviving appeal for hearing on merits, Tribunal has only rectified that mistake - Petition dismissed: HC </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ON</strong> and from 17.02.2011, there was no necessity for obtaining any clearance from the Committee on Disputes. The order dated 18.02.2011 was passed in ignorance of the Supreme Court decision of 17.02.2011. There are justifiable reasons as to why the Tribunal passed that order because it was just one day after the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Electronics Corporation of India Limited. However, the fact remains that on and from 17.02.2011, there was no requirement for obtaining a clearance from the Committee on Disputes. Therefore, as the law declared by the Supreme Court stood on 18.02.2011, the Tribunal was not correct in dismissing the revenue's appeal. The Tribunal has only rectified that mistake by allowing the revenue's said Customs ROA Application by reviving the appeal for hearing on merits. </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>