Jurisprudentiol - Friday's cases

By Vijay Kumar

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

Exemption to goods imported for Common Wealth Games - Exemption extended to suppliers/contractors/vendors or sub-vendors of Organising Committee by amending Notification No 84/2010 cannot be applied retrospectively: CESTAT

VIDE Notification No.13 /2010-Customs 19th February, 2010, Government had exempted specified goods imported by the Organising Committee of the Common Wealth Games, 2010, National sports federations in relation to the Games from the whole of customs duties. Initially, the exemption was limited only to the Organising Committee, but it was later extended to the suppliers or contractors, vendors of sub-vendors of the Committee vide Notification No. 84/2010-Customs New Delhi, dated 27th August, 2010. The appellant is before the Tribunal contending that the exemption to the contractors/vendors etc is applicable retrospectively from the date of issue of original notification No 13/2010 Cus dated 19.02.2010.

Income Tax

Whether when income of assessee is finally assessed u/s 115JB and not under normal provisions of Act, addition can still be made with respect to income determined under normal provisions - NO: ITAT

THE assessee is a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s. O.N.G.C. and engaged in the business of overseas exploration and production of hydrocarbon, oil and gas to supplement the reserves of the parent company and to augment the National Energy Security of India. The assessee filed its return of income declaring loss under the normal provisions of the Act and Book Profit under section 115JB of the Act and paid taxes on Book Profit. The assessment u/s 143(3) was completed after making disallowance on account of depreciation inadmissible and disallowance on account of expenditure relating to project pending final evaluation/ approval written off. However, as a result of the order of the CIT(A) in quantum proceedings, addition made by the AO in respect Sakhalin project, and in respect of Myanmar Project was reduced. In the light of the above, the AO held that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income and thus levied penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. However, CIT(A) deleted the said penalty.

The issue before the Bench is - Whether when income of assessee is finally assessed u/s 115JB and not under normal provisions of the Act, addition can still be made with respect to income determined under normal provisions. And the verdict is NO.

Central Excise

Balance sheet figures included quantity of re-rolled products traded by appellant - demand on differential quantity dropped by CCE& Revenue appeal dismissed by Tribunal - in grounds taken by Revenue, there hardly exists any element of law and entire case is depending on facts - Reference rejected: HC

THE respondent is a manufacturer of re-rolled products of iron and non-alloy steel. During audit of the records it was observed that 26968.312 MTs of re-rolled products have been cleared on payment of excise duty for the year 1993-94 whereas the balance sheet for the corresponding period revealed the transaction in relation to 29049.747 MTs of re-rolled steel.

On that basis, a SCN was issued demanding CE duty on the differential quantity allegedly removed without payment of duty. The assessee submitted that the said quantum of re-rolled products was purchased from outside, and was traded, and in that view of the matter, it cannot be treated as a product manufactured by them. The explanation was found satisfactory and the Commissioner passed an order dropping the proceedings.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements