Jurisprudentiol - Tuesday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Delay in filing supplementary drawback claims - No sufficient grounds to condone delay - Order of Revisional authority upheld: HC

THE dispute relates to rejection of supplementary drawback claims filed by the Petitioner. The Assistant Commissioner (drawback) originally conveyed to the petitioner that eleven shipping bills were found to be time barred as they were not submitted within three months from the date of payment of the original drawback. It also expressed that the reason, if any, shown for condonation of delay, had not been found justifiable. An appeal was preferred before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal of the petitioner by observing, inter-alia, that the reasons given by the petitioner are strong and sufficient enough to condone the delay in filing the supplementary claims and direction was given to the adjudicating authority to dispose of the supplementary drawback claims on merits. On appeal by the department, the Revisional authority restored the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed a Writ Petition before the High Court.

Income Tax

Whether when assessee fails to produce any proof towards claim that goods inventorized at time of Survey also included goods received from its customers for remodeling, such claim is to be construed as an afterthought - YES: ITAT

SURVEY u/s. 133A was conducted at the business premises of the assessee, during which stock of gold and silver lying at the business premises was inventorized and it was found that the assessee had actual physical stock of gold of 21610.620 grams and of silver 111.493 kgs. The book stock of the assessee on that day was worked out at gold 19332.578 grams and silver 106.916 kgs. The assessee was required to explain the difference. During survey, partner of the firm admitted that the above difference in stock in gold and silver was unaccounted income of the assessee.

The issue before the Bench is - Whether when the assessee has failed to produce any proof towards its claim that the goods inventorized at the time of survey also included the goods received from its customers for remodeling, such a claim is to be construed as an afterthought. And the answer goes against the assessee.

Central Excise

CENVAT - Appellant engages agency for advertising their products - advertising agency prepares adverts and utilizes service of another company for broadcasting advertisement - ST paid on broadcasting service is eligible as credit to appellant: CESTAT

THE appellant is engaged in the manufacture of petroleum products. They engaged the services of four advertising agencies for preparing the advertisements for their products. These advertising agencies further engaged the services of Times Global Broadcasting Co. Ltd. for broadcasting the advertisements. The broadcasting company paid service tax in respect of taxable service provided by them and recovered the amounts from the advertising agencies. The advertising agency also raised invoices in favour of the applicant.

The appellant availed credit in respect of the service tax paid on the taxable service of broadcasting done by Times Global Broadcasting Co. Ltd.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements