Jurisprudentiol - Monday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

s.85 of FA, 1994 - General Clauses Act defines month as British Calendar month and it is not defined in terms of number of days - condonation period of one month allowed to Commissioner(A) should not be interpreted as number of days: CESTAT

A Service Tax demand of Rs.4,85,174/- was confirmed against the appellant and their appeal was dismissed as time-barred by the Commissioner (A) on the ground that the appeal was filed on 17/02/2014 in respect of an adjudication order received on 18/11/2013 and, therefore, the appeal has been filed after the expiry of 91 days from the date of communication of the order.

Income Tax

Whether when company's name and products are being advertised or financial results being published, there is any rationale for segregating such expenditure Unit-wise - NO: ITAT

THE assessee concern has raised a ground with regard to the allocation of certain expenses to the assessee's Dehradun Unit, exigible to deduction u/.80-IC, viz. advertisement expenses, legal and professional expenses, audit expenses. It was in the business of manufacture of rectifiers, transformers, devices, thyristors, etc. for telecommunication, railways and defence departments, operating through different units, of which only the Dehradun unit was an eligible undertaking u/s.80-IC. It had claimed a meagre allocation to the Dehradun unit, so that the bulk of the expenditure under the said heads of account stood allocated to non-80-IC units, purportedly on the basis of actual, AO did not found the same acceptable in the absence of proper substantiation of its claims by the assessee and, accordingly, allocated the same on the basis of the turnover of the different units.

The issue before the Bench is - Whether when company's name and products are being advertised or financial results being published, there is any rationale for segregating such expenditure Unit-wise. And the answer is NO.

CENTRAL EXCISE

CX - Purchasing 98% concentrated sulphuric acid and diluting the same with de-mineralised water as per customer requirement to get diluted sulphuric acid, which is marketable and used by battery manufacturing units is a process amounting to manufacture u/s 2(f) of CEA, 1944: CESTAT

THE appellant is engaged in the activity of dilution of sulphuric acid and the finished product is supplied to the battery companies for use in the batteries. The contention of the appellant is that the said activity is not a manufacturing activity as they only mixed two chemicals.

See our Columns Monday for the judgements

Until Monday with more DDT

Have a nice weekend.