Jurisprudentiol - Wednesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Fly Ash used in Cement - grant of rebate for units manufacturing cement using Fly ash in certain districts of UP alone discriminatory - Struck down: Supreme Court

The substantial question of law in these appeals is, whether grant of rebate of tax by the State Government by issuing a notification in exercise of its powers under Section 5 of Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 ("the Act", for short) discriminates between the goods imported from neighbouring States and goods manufactured and produced in the State of Uttar Pradesh and therefore contravenes the Constitutional Provisions viz.; articles 301 and 304(a) of the Constitution of India.

Income Tax

Whether exemption u/s 10B can be denied merely on the basis that confirmation regarding export sale has not been received till date of making such claim - NO: High Court

The issues before the Bench are - Whether exemption u/s 10B can be denied merely on the basis that confirmation regarding export sale has not been received till the date of making such claim; Whether exemption can be denied, even if assessee has made complete disclosure in its books of accounts and Whether penalty for concealment can be warranted in such a case. And the verdict goes against the Revenue.

Central Excise

Valuation - Freight charges collected separately and goods delivered at the buyer's premises; the AV for purpose of excise must be in terms of the Central Excise Act alone and not on the basis of VAT Act - Pre-deposit of Rs.4 Crores set aside: High Court

The impugned order holds that as the freight is included in the value of goods for payment of VAT, it must be included also for arriving at the value of the goods for purposes of the Act is not appropriate. Both the levies are different and the assessable value for purpose of excise must be only in terms of the Act alone and not on the basis of VAT Act. The regime under the Act is transaction value and each transaction is to be separately assessed depending upon the terms of the contract and the time the ownership in goods is passed."

Service Tax

Section 66A is attracted only when services are received in India by a person situated in India even if such persons may have permanent establishment abroad: CESTAT

The provisions of Section 66A are attracted only when services are received in India by a person situated in India even if such persons may have permanent establishment abroad. In the present case, the appellant has provided services through their branches abroad to customers located abroad. Therefore, it is not a case of the appellant receiving the services but it is a question of rendering services abroad. Therefore, prima facie view is that the provisions of Section 66A are not at all attracted. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements