TIOL-DDT 2719 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <title>Untitled Document</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> </head> <body> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=23157"><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/limca_book2015_1.jpg" alt="DDT in Limca Book of Records - Third Time in a row" width="300" height="148" hspace="5" border="0" align="right" ></a> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL-DDT 2719</font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br> 05 11 2015<br> </font><font size="2"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thursday</font></font></strong></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em>Waiver from payment of cost recovery charge in respect of ICDs/ CFSs, Seaports, Air Cargo Complexes</em></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>ORGANISATIONS</strong> requiring the <font color="#993300">services</font> of Customs Officers for performing various statutory duties are required to pay the costs of these officers. The Department used to create cost recovery posts, especially for this purpose. Issue of waiver from the payment of cost recovery charge in respect of ICDs/ CFSs, Seaports, Air Cargo Complexes, Courier Terminals, Diamond Plazas, etc. was under consideration of the Board for some time.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now, the CBEC has decided that Chief Commissioner of Customs/Central Excise are authorized: -</font></p> <blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(i) to exempt cost recovery charges for eligible facilities for posts that were not sanctioned. The exemption shall be for staff deployed. Excess staff, if any, deployed over and above the staffing norms, shall be withdrawn but without causing dislocation in work;</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(ii) exemption from cost recovery charges for eligible facilities for which posts were sanctioned would be for the entire staff sanctioned (for which cost recovery charges were taken) even if it is in excess of the staffing norms fixed subsequently, in 2013; and</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(iii) at eligible facilities having both sanctioned and non-sanctioned posts, the exemption of cost recovery charges for non- sanctioned posts would be dealt with as per decision at (i) above and for sanctioned posts, it would be as per decision at (ii) above.</font></p> </blockquote> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is only a one time measure. Regular requests for waiver of cost recovery charges would be processed by the Directorate General of Human Resource Development, CBEC.</font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTg3Mjk=" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE - F. No. 8/13/28/HRD(EMC)/CRB/2014 pt., Dated November 03 2015</strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em>NDPS - Evidence of Police officer as sole witness acceptable - Conviction upheld - SC </em></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FFFFFF" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#F8A061" span="span"><strong>THERE</strong> is no legal proposition that evidence of police officials unless supported by independent evidence is unworthy of acceptance.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court yesterday delivered a landmark judgement in a Narcotics case.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It started 25 years ago in September 1990, when a police party seized 33 gunny bags containing poppy from a tractor with a trolley. In the trial court, the prosecution examined only one witness an Assistant Sub Inspector. The trial court acquitted the accused on the ground that only one prosecution witness was examined and his evidence was not trustworthy to base the conviction.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The High Court however reversed the acquittal and sentenced the accused to 12 years imprisonment. This was 2003. The convict appealed to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court decided the case yesterday.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Supreme Court observed that </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#F3DBCF">there is no legal proposition that evidence of police officials unless supported by independent evidence is unworthy of acceptance. Evidence of police witnesses cannot be discarded merely on the ground that they belong to police force and interested in the investigation and their desire to see the success of the case. Prudence however requires that the evidence of police officials who are interested in the outcome of the result of the case needs to be carefully scrutinized and independently appreciated. Mere fact that they are police officials does not by itself give rise to any doubt about their creditworthiness.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Twenty five years after he was arrested, the Apex Court has convicted him to ten years imprisonment.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We bring you this judgement today. Please see <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=25132" target="_blank">Breaking News</a>.</strong></font></p> <p align="center"><strong><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em>FTP - Application for Duty Credit Scrips of additional 2% under Market Linked Focus Product Scheme (MLFPS) - DGFT Clarifies</em></font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>UNDER</strong> the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14, DGFT vide <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=47&filename=notification/dgft/2013/dgft13pn053.htm" target="_blank"> <strong>Public Notice No. 53 </strong></a>dated 27.2.2014 allowed for grant of additional Duty Credit Scrips @ 2% to certain specified products under the Market Linked Focus Product Scheme (MLFPS) for exports made w.e.f. 1.3.2014 to 31.8.2014 if exported to the EU (27 countries). This 2% duty credit scrip was in addition to the benefits of 2% under Focus Product Scheme (FPS).</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It has come into the notice of DGFT through various representations that few exporters have already filed their application for FPS and received their claim. But they are eligible for additional benefits as per the Public Notice and are unable to file their applications online as their shipping bills have already been utilised to claim benefit under FPS and the system does not allow the claim of additional benefit on the utilised shipping bills</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT instructs that the exporters may file a letter with the RA to claim additional benefit intimating the details of earlier application No. (E-Com Reference no.) file no. etc. along with shipping bill number, date of shipping bill, description etc. and coverage indicating serial no. of the Public Notice. RA may verify the claim and thereafter issue supplementary scrip.</font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTg3MjE=" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGFT Trade Notice No. 08/2015., Dated: November 03, 2015</strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><strong>CBEC on Facebook and Twitter - Wants officers to send bytes</strong></em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> use of Social Media to engage with the stakeholders was discussed by the CBEC in the meeting held on 16th October, 2015.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board took note of the fact that a number of government ministries/organisations are making use of Social Media, <em>inter alia</em>, to disseminate information, generate awareness, education etc. The Board, accordingly, <strong>approved</strong> the use of Social Media for the said purpose.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board was informed that timely input/information are not received by the DGTS, which does not allow regular and timely updating of CBEC's account on Facebook and Twitter handle.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board has therefore, <strong>directed</strong> that all wings & field formations of CBEC should regularly send <em>"inputs or bytes"</em> to DGTS. This would fulfil the objective of<font color="#CC3333"> <em><font color="#993300">a rich and rewarding user experience for visitors to our social media accounts</font></em></font><em><font color="#993300">.</font></em></font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTg3Mjg=" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC F. No. 296/282/2015-CX.9., Dated November 04 2015</strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><strong><font color="#006600">Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT Notified</font></strong></em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> President of CESTAT has notified the creation of the Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The jurisdiction of the Regional Bench will be Appeals arising from territories within the territorial jurisdiction of Union Territory of Chandigarh, the States of Punjab & Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Regional Bench, Chandigarh shall start functioning by accepting filing of appeals w.e.f. 01.12.2015 at the following address:</font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Ist-3" Floor, SCO No. 147-148, Sector-17C, Chandigarh- 160017.</font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTg3Mjc=" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CESTAT Notification No. 02/2015., Dated November 04 2015</strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><font color="#006600" size="3"><strong>Over a Crore of rupees already spent on Chandigarh Bench of CESTAT</strong></font></em></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> CESTAT in an RTI reply yesterday informed that an amount of Rs. 1,01,36,884 has been spent so far on the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal. The amount spent on the Hyderabad Bench which is yet to be notified was Rs. 87,16,700 on civil and electric works. The Nation got the Allahabad Bench almost free as the total expenditure so far had been only Rs. 55,014 and that too was paid to Packers and Movers.</font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Have a nice day.</strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mail your comments to </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> <a href="mailto:vijaywrite@tiol.in"><strong>vijaywrite@tiol.in</strong></a></font></p> </body> </html>