TIOL-DDT 208 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<html> <head> <title>Untitled Document</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#006633" size="3">TIOL-DDT 208</font><br> 23 09 2005<br> Friday</b></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <b>Anti-dumping duty on Nylon Tyre Cord Fabric (NTCF), originating in, or exported from People’s Republic of China</b></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The anti dumping duty on this product was imposed by Notification No. 36/2005 – cus dated 27.4.2005. Now this notification is amended to exclude M/s Shandong Polytex Chemical Fibre Co. Ltd, People’s Republic of China (previously known as M/s Weifang Great Dragon Chemical Fibre Co. Ltd.) from the purview of the anti dumping duty as they have furnished an undertaking and the designated authority has suspended the antidumping investigations on acceptance of price undertaking given by them. <br> <br> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2005/ctariff05_086.htm">Notification. No. 86/2005-Customs, dated the 22nd September, 2005</a></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <b>Single C form for a quarter instead of year – CST Rules amended</b></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> As per Rule 12(1) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957, a single declaration (C Form) may cover all transactions of sale which take place in one financial year between the same two dealers subject to the condition that where, in the case of any transaction of sale, the delivery of goods is spread over to different financial years it shall be necessary to furnish a separate declaration or certificate in respect of goods so delivered in each financial year. Now the year is changed to a quarter. Every simplification produces more paper. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/cstnot.htm">(F.No. 24/1/2005-ST) dated September 16, 2005</a></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>We are not responsible for stock market crash – Raids are routine and visit of JS to Mumbai is more routine – Finance Ministry</b></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> The Central Board of Direct Taxes clarifies that the searches were conducted at a few places in Gujarat as part of normal investigations carried out by the Income Tax Department in Gujarat. There is no basis for drawing any general or speculative conclusions from these searches. <br> <br> It is also clarified that the visit of the Joint Secretary (Capital market) yesterday to Mumbai was to participate in the Board Meetings of the UTI AMC and the Central bank of India. After the meetings, he came back to Delhi yesterday night itself.</font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Extension to senior officers to ensure two year tenure – Revenue Board Chairmen not included</b></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Cabinet has decided to provide a two-year tenure, if necessary by extending the service to <br> 1. Defence Secretary,<br> 2. Home Secretary, <br> 3. Director (IB), <br> 4. Secretary, Research and Analysis Wing and <br> 5. Director, CBI<br> <br> This facility is already available to the Cabinet Secretary. But nobody has thought of doing so for the Chairmen of the Revenue Boards. The Government was not very happy with the former Chairman of the CBEC who had a listless <b>three</b> years as Chairman due to various factors, including a CBI raid on his senior. <br> <br> If you think it is worth having a Board, it is worth having a working Board and the tenure of the Members and the Chairman should be at least three years. Of course there is near unanimous opinion among the staff that the Board is absolutely unnecessary and serves no useful purpose. For another ten years we may not have a Chairman with more than a year of service in the Board. For any person to be really effective at the helm of affairs of a large and important department like, Revenue, a minimum tenure of two years is a must. <br> <br> Even without granting an extension this can be achieved, if as a one time measure you appoint six Chief Commissioners (or Commissioners if Chief Commissioners are not available) who are less than 55 years of age as Board members and further promotion to the Board should be given only to those who are less than 55 and only the one who has more than two years service left should be elevated to the post of Chairman. Every Board Member should be assured of a post - retirement job for two years as the <b>plus two</b> syndrome is affecting the work culture in the department. All senior officers above 59 are in search of those plus two jobs. Tribunal, Settlement Commission etc has become post - retirement options. If these high power organisations should not become parking grounds for old, tired and retired officials, we should have a maximum age limit for these organisations too. Any one above 55 should not be allowed to join these bodies. <br> <br> Yet another way should be to give a little chance for merit. At every stage starting from Inspector, 50% of the promotions should be by merit through a tough written examination of the laws these officers are paid to administer. In course of time we will have some talented officers at the top instead of every one just drifting up and up till he reaches the top.</font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <b>PIL against Service Tax collection by BSNL</b></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has admitted a PIL to prevent BSNL from collecting Service Tax from its customers. According to the petitioners, the Service Provider is required to pay the Service Tax and not the service recipient and BSNL cannot shift the burden to the consumers. <br> <br> <font color="#FF6666"><b>Until Monday with more DDT<br> <br> Have a nice day. <br> <br> Mail your comments to</b></font> <a href="vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com </a></font></p> </body> </html>