Jurisprudentiol-Wednesday's cases
Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Central Excise
Notification has to be interpreted in light of words employed by it and not on any other basis-NCCD, although duty of excise, is not exempted in terms of notification 50/2003-CE: HC
THE petitioner is aggrieved with the SCN dated 26th August, 2011 issued by the CCE, LTU, Mumbai seeking denial of exemption from levy of National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) under the notification 50/2003-CE.
It is mentioned in the SCN that NCCD is a duty of excise, but that it is not exempted under the implementing notification because it is not a duty specified in the I & II Schedule of the CETA, 1985, nor an Additional Duty of Excise, as specified in the implementing notification. It is also emphasized that the impugned notice is based upon the law laid down by Himachal Pradesh High Court in Indo Farm Tractors and Motors vs. Union of India - to the effect that the absence of inclusion of NCCD under the subject notification would mean that NCCD was not exempt thereunder.
Income Tax
Whether any interference is required by HC when assessee-trust has been imparting education and fees approved by AICTE are being utilitised to create educational infrastructure - NO: HC
THE assessee is a trust registered u/s 12A. It had filed its return disclosing its total loss at Rs.3,96,54,653/- and claimed exemption u/s 11. However, the AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) determining the total income at Rs.3,06,53,610/-. The AO had also disallowed exemption u/s 11 on the ground that the assessee was making systematic profit year after year. In addition, the AO also noticed that the assessee had incurred capital expenditure of Rs.51,24,483/- and diverted income to capital funds amounting to Rs.28,75,204/- which as per AO could not be treated as application of income u/s 11(1). Finally, the AO also added depreciation of Rs.95,90,956/- to the income of assessee.
The issue before the Bench is - Whether any interference is required by the High Court when the assessee-trust has been imparting education and the fees approved by the competent authority are being utilised to create educational infrastructure. NO is the HC's answer.
Customs
When GOI certifies and registers vessel M.V. Geo Hind Sagar as ‘ research' ship, other wing of GOI, Department of Revenue understands same vessel as Seismographic 'survey' vessel - revoking CB licence of the appellant is absolutely unwarranted - Appeal allowed: CESTAT
THE Commissioner of Customs, Kandla revoked the Customs broker licence issued to the appellant and forfeited the security deposit of the appellant.
It is alleged in the enquiry conducted against the appellant that they had misdeclared the imported vessel by declaring it as Seismic Research Vessel and claimed benefit of exemption from whole of Customs duty under Notification No.21/2002-Cus (Sr.No.354). Inasmuch as after investigation it was found that the said vessel is correctly classifiable as Seismic Survey Vessel and liable to Customs duty as benefit of exemption notification 21/2002-Cus was not available. The duty which allegedly escaped payment is approximately Rs.9.25 Crores. Suffice to say that after enquiry the Customs broker was alleged to have colluded in the evasion of duty and the licence came to be revoked.
Until Tomorrow with more DDT
Have a nice day.
Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in