Jurisprudentiol - Tuesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Refund - Export of goods - Tax paid on services of Commission agent on reverse charge basis - refund claimed under incorrect notfn. 17/2009-ST instead of 18/2009-ST - Claim rejected by original authority without issuance of SCN or giving personal hearing - Matter remanded: CESTAT

THE appellants are exporters of goods and availed the services of Commission Agents located abroad. On the amounts paid to Commission agents they are paying service tax on reverse charge basis and availing CENVAT credit of the tax paid.

The CE officers who audited their unit suggested that the appellant should reverse the CENVAT credit and avail the exemption under Notification 18/2009-ST dated 7.7.2009.

Income Tax

Whether provisions of Sec 153C allow AO to invoke it casually and need not record any satisfaction - NO: Bombay HC

BEFORE High Court, the Revenue's counsel had submitted that section 153C had been brought on the statute book so as to enable assessment of the income of any other person. It was submitted that this section opens with a non-obstante clause and enables AO to proceed and assess the income of any other person. It was submitted that whenever the AO was satisfied that any money, bullion, jewelery or other valuable article or thing or books of account or documents seized or requisitioned belongs or belong to a person other than the person referred to in section 153A then, such seized documents or assets and equally requisitioned shall be handed over to AO, having jurisdiction over such other person. It was further submitted that this section mandates that AO must proceed to issue notices and assess or reassess the income of such other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A.

The issues issue before the Bench is - Whether the provisions of Sec 153C allow the AO to invoke it casually and need not record any satisfaction. And the answer goes against the Revenue.

Central Excise

Penalty u/r 26(2) of CER, 2002 on first stage dealer for purported issue of fraudulent invoices - Penalty is imposed on basis of assumption and presumption which have no legs to stand - without categorical finding, no penalty can be imposed: CESTAT

THE appellant, Proprietor, obtained registration as a First stage dealer in January, 2004. He filed Nil return for the quarter ending March, 2004 and June, 2004 and upto 20.7.2004. Thereafter, he surrendered the Registration on 21.7.2004 on the ground that no business has been transacted during the registration period.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements