TIOL-DDT 2216 · 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 align="justify"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><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=17063"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/limca_book2013.jpg" alt="DDT in Limca Book of Records" width="175" height="120" hspace="5" border="0" align="right"></a></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong><font color="#663399" size="3">T</font></font></strong><font color="#663399" size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IOL-DDT 2216 </strong></font><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong></strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><br>
</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>24.10.2013 <br>
Thursday</strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong> </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Service Tax - A/C Canteens in Factories exempted - Is there Confusion? - Board should immediately clarify</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</STRONG> has exempted Services provided in relation to serving of food or beverages by a <strong>canteen </strong> maintained in a factory covered under the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), having the facility of air-conditioning or central air-heating at any time during the year. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This has been done by inserting a new entry 19A in the mega exemption Notification No.25/2012-Service Tax,dated the 20th June,2012. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Immediately after we carried the notification,we received frantic calls and mails from concerned assessees. Their concern was - air-conditioned canteens are exempted. Does this mean that non-A/c canteens are not exempted? An assessee sought our immediate clarification stating, “<em>In my opinion there is a drafting error in the notification,the notification should be that Services provided by a canteen maintained in a factory <strong>other than those </strong> having the facility of air conditioning or central air heating is exempted from payment of service tax</em>.” </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This doesn't seem to be the intention of the Government. Read on… </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">At present vide notification 25/2012-ST,the following services are exempted - </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">19. Services provided in relation to serving of food or beverages by a <strong>restaurant,eating joint or a mess </strong>,other than those having the facility of air-conditioning or central air-heating in any part of the establishment,at any time during the year; </font></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Simply put,a restaurant,eating joint or a mess and <em>which can include a Canteen in a factory </em> and which does not have either the air conditioning or heating facility is <strong>not </strong>liable to pay any Service Tax. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">However, a canteen in a factory, which has the facility of air conditioning or central air heating,<em> is <strong>required </strong>to pay service tax. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, the government has in its wisdom exempted <em>such canteens </em> maintained in a factory & covered under the Factories Act, 1948 from Service Tax by virtue of this notification. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">After all, the CENVAT credit issues were taking a heavy toll on these companies. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">To conclude, there seems to be no problem with this notification. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Another view </strong>: We asked an expert and this is what he stated: </font></p>
<table width="90%" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td><p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#00FFFF" span="span"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Vide Notification No 14/2013 issued on 22.10.2013, a new entry 19A has been inserted after entry 19 in Exemption Notification 25/2012 ST dated 20.06.2012. After inserting 19A, the Notification reads: </font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#00FFFF" span="span"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>19. </strong> Services provided in relation to serving of food or beverages by a restaurant, eating joint or a mess,other than those having the facility of air-conditioning or central air-heating in any part of the establishment, at any time during the year; </font> </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#00FFFF" span="span"><strong>19A. </strong> Services provided in relation to serving of food or beverages by a canteen maintained in a factory covered under the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), having the facility of air-conditioning or central air-heating at any time during the year. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#00FFFF" span="span">While the new entry intends to exempt air conditioned / central air heating canteens maintained in a factory covered under the Factories Act, 1948, it has opened several issues on taxability of non-AC / non - Air Heating canteens maintained in a factory covered under Factories Act, 1948. Since the new entry covers only Air conditioned canteens, what is the liability of non Air Conditioned canteens? Are they covered under existing entry No 19? If yes,is a canteen in factory is same as a “restaurant,eating joint or a mess” mentioned in entry No 19? Will the field formations accept this interpretation? Will they not now issue demand notices for non-AC canteens on the ground that the exemption under entry No 19A is applicable only for AC canteens? Why can't the Board explain the effect of this amendment in clear terms as DGFT does instead of leaving it to be decided by the Tribunal? And what about those factories which are not required to statutorily provide a canteen,(having less than 250employees) yet prefer to provide AC canteen facility for the benefit of their employees? Should they pay service tax while the bigger factories having of more than 250 employees enjoy exemption? </font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#00FF00" span="span"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The idea seems to be that non airconditioned canteens are already exempted and now the Government has exempted airconditioned canteens also, but apparently, there is no clarity and doubts persist in the minds of highly knowledgeable assessees.</font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe
the use of, ‘<em>eating joint' </em> in Sl. No 19 and <em>canteen </em> in
19A has created the confusion and the whole issue hangs on, whether <em>joint </em> includes
a <em>canteen</em>. But should Government notifications be using taboo (slang)
words like “JOINT”? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It seems many assessees have represented to the Government to exempt the service of outdoor catering provided by private caterers in their canteens or at least to allow the CENVAT credit of the Service Tax paid on this catering and what they got is this notification. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And another expert told me that the sentence,<em> </em></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Services provided in relation to serving of food or beverages by a canteen maintained in a <strong>factory </strong> covered under the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), having the facility of air-conditioning or central air-heating at any time during the year</em></font></font> <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> implies air-conditioning for a <strong>factory </strong> and not for <strong>canteen </strong>because there is no comma after ‘canteen'. If they wanted to exempt canteen,the notification should have read as,<em> </em></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Services provided in relation to serving of food or beverages by a canteen</em><strong><em>,</em></strong><em> maintained in a <strong>factory </strong> covered under the Factories Act, 1948 (63 of 1948), having the facility of air-conditioning or central air-heating at any time during the year. </em></font> </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board should give an immediate clarification before litigation mounts, as this is likely to affect every factory. Please please don't make this a litigation matter for the next twenty years. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=40&filename=notification/servicetax/2013/stnot13_014.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 14/2013 - ST.,Dated: October 22,2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FTP - Import of new motorcycles from Bangladesh through Land Customs Stations (LCSs) across Indo-Bangladesh Border </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has amended the policy condition in Chapter 87 of ITC(HS) 2012 Schedule 1 (Import Policy). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">At present the import of new vehicles is permitted only through the Customs port at Nhava Sheva, Kolkata, Chennai, Chennai Airport, Cochin, ICD Tughlakabad and Delhi Air Cargo, Mumbai Port and Mumbai Air Cargo Complex, ICD Talegaon Pune, ICD Faridabad and Ennore Port. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now <em>import of new motorcycles is also permitted through LCS, Benapole/Petrapole and LCS, Agartala. </em>(across Indo-Bangladesh Border) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2013/dgft13not046.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Notification No 46/(RE - 2013)/2009-2014,Dated: October 23,2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FTP - re-fixation of Annual Average Export Obligation </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>PARA</strong> 5.11.2 of the Hand Book of Procedure Volume 1 (HBPv1) permits re-fixation of Annual Average Export Obligation, in case the export in any sector/ product group declines by more than 5%. This implies that for the sector/product group that witnessed such decline in 2012-13 as compared to 2011 -12,would be entitled for such relief. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT has communicated a list of such product groups showing the percentage decline in exports during 2012-13 as compared to 2011-12. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, DGFT wants Regional Offices to re-fix the annual average export obligation for EPCG Authorizations for the year 2012-13 accordingly. Reduction, if any, in the EO should be appropriately endorsed in the licence file of the office of RA as also in the Amendment Sheet to be issued to the EPCG Authorisation holder. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Regional Offices while considering requests of discharge of Export Obligation will ensure that in case of shortfall of Export Obligation Policy Circulars earlier issued in terms of Para 5.11.2 of HBP 2009-14 are also considered before issuance of demand notice etc. This stipulation should also form part of Check-Sheet for the purpose of EODC. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=46&filename=notification/dgft/2013/dgft13cir007.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Policy Circular No 07/2009-2014 (RE 2012),Dated: October 23,2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>FTP - SION - Leather and Leather Product </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT has revised the Standard Input Output Norms (SION) for entries No.G-7 and G-46 of Leather and Leather Product. No changes have been made either in description of the export product or in the permissible quantity of relevant inputs (in some cases, input has been deleted). </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=47&filename=notification/dgft/2013/dgft13pn032.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Public Notice No 32/(RE: 2013)/2009-2014,Dated: October 23,2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Anti Dumping Duty on Vitrified Porcelain Tiles - Provisional Assessment - Finalised </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti 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 “imposed vide notification 73/2003-Cusdated 01.05.2003 and in respect of goods originating in or exported from China PR was continued by notfn. 82/2008-Cus dated 27.06.2008.. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Based on the recommendations of the Designated Authority, on review,Government had ordered provisional assessment in respect of two parties on the goods, when originating in or exported from China PR by Notification No. 35/2012-Customs (ADD), dated the 10th July, 2012. Now the Government has ordered final assessment. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=337&filename=notification/custom/2013/ctariffadd13_025.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No.25/2013-Cus.,(ADD),Dated: October 22,2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax - Defective Returns - Unpaid Tax </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Directorate of Systems in CBDT informs the Chief Commissioners of Income Tax that a number of e-Returns were submitted for the AY 2013-14 showing unpaid self-assessment tax. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Director, Systems wants the assessing officers to issue notices and follow up these cases to ensure that self-assessment tax is deposited by the assessees at the earliest. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=36&filename=notification/cbdt/2013/cbdt_letter_defective.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DIT
(Systems) F. No.DIT/(S)-III/CPC/2013-14/Unpaid-Self-Assessment-TAX, Dated:
October 22,2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax - Notices Issued by CPC where demand/refund is greater than Rs. 5000 </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In pursuance of the decision of the full Board, the CPC is allowed to issue refunds without adjustment of demand as an interim measure in cases where either the outstanding demand or refund claim was less than Rs. 5000/-. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, Director (Systems) wants the Assessing Officers to perform necessary verification and correction and communicate the findings on adjustable demand to the CPC, Bengaluru. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=36&filename=notification/cbdt/2013/cbdt_letter_refunds.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DIT
(Systems) F. No.DIT/(S)-III/CPC/2013-14/Refund Adjustment, Dated: October
22, 2013 </strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">SCNs issued by both, CCE, Raigad and CST, Mumbai - department unsure who is to adjudicate - matter remanded: CESTAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>SERVICE
TAX </strong>credit of Rs.7.80 Crores was denied to the appellant by the <em>CCE, Raigad
vide an o-in-o dated 29/10/2012</em>. This credit had been distributed
to the appellant by their Head Office situated in Mumbai, which falls under
the jurisdiction of <em>Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai</em>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Before the CESTAT against this order, the appellant submitted that there is a question of jurisdiction to be decided in this case i.e. whether the case should be decided by the <em>Raigad Commissioner</em>, who is having jurisdiction on the recipient of the service tax or by the <em>Commissioner of Service Tax</em>, who is having jurisdiction on the input service distributor, who has distributed the credit and is registered with the service tax department and this point though raised before the adjudicating authority was not considered. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is further submitted that the <em>Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai </em> has also issued a SCN to the <strong><em>appellant </em></strong> on 12/10/2012 demanding reversal of credit to the extent of Rs.5.12 crore for the period 2008-09 to 2011-12 and which period <em>overlaps </em> the period involved in the present O-in-O and which was 2005-06 to 2011-12. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Incidentally, it appears that the jurisdictional authorities are also a bit confused and so, they have also written to the <em>Central Board of Excise & Customs </em> seeking clarification as to who should decide the case i.e. whether the <em>Commissioner of Service Tax </em> where the ISD is registered or the <em>Commissioner in-charge </em> of the manufacturing unit, who has utilized the credit distributed by the ISD. It is also mentioned that the matter is said to be receiving the attention of the Board. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Observing that the jurisdiction issue goes to the “root” of the case,and which has not been considered,the order was set aside by the Bench and the matter was remanded to the <em>CCE, Raigad </em> to await the outcome of the reference made to the CBEC and then consider the matter afresh,<em> if required</em>. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>They wait…we wait…and someone has a hearty laugh! </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See </strong></font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/caseLawDet.php?QoPmnXyZ=OTA0MjE=" target="_blank">2013-TIOL-1577-CESTAT-MUM</a></strong></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"> - Friday's cases</font></strong></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><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"></font><font color="#663399">Service Tax </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Multilevel Marketing Service Scheme - commission received by the appellants from FSL is the result of the marketing/promotion of FSL products by the appellants and constitutes a service (Business Auxiliary Service): CESTAT </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> appellants entered into an agreement with M/s Fashion Suitings Pvt. Ltd., Bhilwara Rajasthan for the purpose of selling the company's product as per the RCM Business Marketing Plan (RCM - Right Concept Marketing). According to terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties, FSL issues a scratch card having a password along with a standard product "Kit of the Products" by charging a price for it. Any person can submit an application through the internet using password and after acceptance becomes a distributor of the company for the purpose of selling the company's product under the RCM plan. </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 income received by assessee by sub-leasing of leased out property and from maintenance and airconditioning hire charges has to be assessed as income from House Property or business income - HC partly rules against Revenue </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> issues before the Bench are - Whether the income received by the assessee by sub-leasing of already leased out property and from maintenance charges and air conditioning hire charges, is to be assessed as Income from House Property and not income from business; Whether when the rental income falls within the specific head of "income from house property", the mere fact of the assessee having business in letting out the property as stated in its memorandum, by itself, will not conclusively point out that the income is nothing but business income and Whether before invoking Section 22 of the Act, for the purpose of assessing the rental income as "income from the house property", the Revenue authorities must go into the question as to whether there was any exploitation of the property by their owner by giving it away for rent, before assessing such rental income as 'income from house property'. Verdict partly goes against Revenue. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Excise </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><strong><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Whether credit of ST paid on outward freight services in respect of MV parts cleared from factory and assessed in terms of s.4A of the CEA,1944 is available w.e.f 01/04/2008 - Pre-deposit waived and stay granted: CESTAT </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>SINCE </STRONG>as per the Rule 2(l) of the CCR,2004,"input service" includes outward freight only up to the place of removal and the place of removal is the factory, the department was of the view that the appellant is not eligible for the credit of service tax paid on outward freight incurred beyond the place of removal and accordingly sought to deny the credit availed by the appellant on such outward freight. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Though there is some merit in the Revenue's contention that w.e.f. 1-4-2008, in view of the amendment made in the definition of input service relating to outward freight and the decision of the High Court of Karnataka in the ABB case, CENVAT credit would not be available in respect of outward freight services, in appellant's own case in respect of their Hinjewadi Unit, the benefit of credit on outward freight services has been extended vide O-i-O NO. 15/CEX/2012 dated 23/4/2012 for the period after 1-4-2008. The same benefit cannot be denied to the Chakan unit of the appellant. </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">Misdeclaration - Human is to err - not really - Matter before Third Member </font></strong></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>MISDECLARATION </STRONG>is one of the greatest crimes in Customs. It is human to commit an error - but not while declaring your product before Customs; if you do you will have to face the Customs terror. In this case even a departmental officer like the Commissioner (Appeals) felt that the Customs Act provided for rectification of a mistake. In the Tribunal Member (J) felt it was human to err, but Member(T) felt that there was deliberate misdeclaration and so the matter goes to Third Member. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements </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"><strong>Have a Nice Day. </strong></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">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com </a></font></p>
</body>
</html>