Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Appellant engaged in business of acquiring land suitable for setting up wind farm projects as designated by M/s SEL and providing such land on an exclusive basis to customer of M/s SEL - no Real Estate agent service can be said to have been provided by M/s SRL to M/s SEL - Appeal allowed: CESTAT

M/s. SEL, manufacturer of Wind Turbine Generators offers "total solutions" in wind power generation comprising of design, installation and operation and maintenance services, and identification, acquisition and provision of suitable land for wind farm projects to its customers. The appellant, M/s. SRL, an associate company of M/s. SEL, are primarily engaged in the business of acquiring land, suitable for wind farm projects, as identified by M/s. SEL and providing such land to the customers of M/s. SEL for setting up the wind farm projects.

The CCE, Pune-III in his O-in-O dt. 29.11.2006 held that M/s. SRL has provided Real Estate Agent Service and confirmed a Service Tax demand of Rs.3,07,83,184/- and imposed penalties galore. The amount of Rs.88.12 lakhs paid by the appellant during investigation was also appropriated.

Income Tax

Whether when assessee fails to explain huge increase in sundry creditors and unsecured loans, additions made by AO in this regard are legally sustainable - YES: HC

THE assessee filed its return for the Assessment Year 2000-01 declaring loss. The case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny and a notice under Section 143(2) was dispatched by the Income Tax Authorities on 30.10.2001. The Assessing Officer, thereafter, sent further notices for the purposes of the scrutiny assessment. In response to the said notices, N, one of the then partners of the assessee firm, appeared before the Assessing Officer but showed his inability to produce any accounts or other details as sought by the Assessing Officer. He stated that there were certain disputes between the partners of the assessee firm and a suit had been instituted in this Court wherein a Local Commissioner had been appointed to inspect and sign the books of accounts relating to the businesses of the partners including the assessee firm. The books and other accounts were stated to be in the custody of the Local Commissioner appointed by the Court. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under Section 144 on best judgment basis.

The issues before the Bench is - Whether when assessee fails to explain huge increase in sundry creditors and unsecured loans, additions made by AO in this regard are legally sustainable. And the answer goes against the assessee.

NDPS

NDPS Act - Recall of Bail - One Bench can cancel bail granted by another

CAN the Bench cancel a bail already given by another Bench? The High Court observed,

"It is needless to say virtually the scope for cancellation sought is for recalling of the order passed by the Court based on the cardinal principle governed by the Latin maxim "Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit", i.e. "An act of the Court not sanctioned by law shall prejudice no one". It is needless to say for such recall, the inherent power of the Court which inheres in every Court from its very constitution, subject to the saving and unless denied by way of statutory interdiction with all breadth and length is to the necessity, to apply to meet the ends of justice, including to undo a wrong or irregular thing as no Court can perpetrate an illegality or even an irregularity generally, when necessary facts brought to its notice.

See our Columns tomorrow for the judgements