TIOL-DDT 2757 · 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><strong><font color="#663399" size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL-DDT 2757</font><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
04 01 2016<br>
Monday</font></strong></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em><font color="#006600">Tedious TDS </font></em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> the tax administration, the Government wants you to do most of the work the tax officials are supposed to do and if you make a small mistake, they will show you hell. An entrepreneur wonders, <em>"instead of being grateful to me for doing their work free, why do they treat me like a criminal?</em>" </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Recently a High Court summarised the tasks to be performed by deductors in relation to TDS provisions: </font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>(a) Ascertain from its books of account as to which payments/expenses are covered under TDS provisions. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(b) Check up monthly record for applying the TDS provisions when payments exceed certain threshold limits mentioned in the Act. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(c) Collect PAN details from the deductee which normally are either verbally spoken by the deductee or sent by message/copy of PAN Card. Deductee does not have any mechanism to easily check the correctness of the PAN verbally spoken/received by message. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(d) deduct the TDS/TCS at the applicable rates by the end of the month. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(e) deposit the collected TDS normally within 7 days of the next month following the month in which tax has been deducted/collected. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(f) Collect various information at the end of the quarter for deductees of whom tax has been deducted/tax deducted at lower rate/no tax deducted for certain categories of deductees mentioned in the provisions of the Act. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(g) Furnish separate quarterly statement for salary, non-salary and tax collected at source. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(g) Furnish the forms manually/electronically in the way provided by Centralized Processing Cell TDS which gets some changes regularly due to advancement in technology. </font></em></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><em><strong><font color="#006600">Income Tax -PAN Correction only for two alpha and two numeric characters </font></strong></em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>WHILE</strong> deducting TDS, what happens if you make a mistake in the PAN of the deductee? You realise the mistake and want to correct it. A little known fact is the Income Tax Department System does not allow correction of more than four characters in the PAN.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Suppose your deductee's PAN is AABCG2414F and you mentioned AABCG4029R by mistake. Now this will not be allowed to be corrected because there is correction in 4 numeric and one alpha characters. </font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Strange but true! And totally illegal!</font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em><font color="#006600">TDS Deductors beware - a mistake in deductee's PAN and you're doomed </font></em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IF</strong> you are a TDS deductor, what happens if you make a mistake in the PAN of the deductee? And you are not able to correct it as the Income Tax Department will allow correction of only four characters! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Income Tax Department will treat it as if the deductee had no PAN and you will be asked to pay 20% as TDS instead of 2%. Interest and penalty added in good measure. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is exactly what happened to a mega PSU - the ONGC. Read the details: </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">During quarters 1, 2 & 3 of F.Y. 2013-14 ONGC (assessee deductor) deducted tax at source from one of the contractors namely Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation Ltd., a Government of Gujarat Undertaking (GETCO Ltd.) and the assessee was required to deduct 2% from the sum paid/credited to the deductee i.e. GETCO Ltd. ONGC duly deducted and deposited the tax and filed the quarterly TDS return in form 26Q as per Income-tax Rules. In form no.26Q deductor who deducts the TDS is required to furnish the details of deductee including his PAN as well as amount of sum credited/paid and TDS deducted. Inadvertently the assessee mentioned wrong PAN of the deductee due to which Centralized Processing Cell-TDS treated wrong PAN as no PAN and accordingly created demand for all the three quarters by imposing a burden of 18% as difference of low TDS deducted because as per the provisions of section 206AA of the Act in the cases when any sum is paid to deductee who does not furnish PAN, the deductor is liable to deduct TDS at rate specified in the relevant provisions of the Act or at the ra<a></a>tes in force or @ 20%, whichever is higher calculated on the sum paid/credited to the deductee. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The assessee ONGC tried to rectify the mistake by filing correction statement but the same was rejected for the very reason that the system only allows the change of 4 characters subject to maximum of two numerical characters and two alpha characters. Whereas in the wrong PAN quoted by the deductor there were more than 4 changes and, therefore, correction statement was not accepted. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">On appeal, the learned CIT(A) was pleased to confirm the demand. (what else do you think a Commissioner is for?) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">ONGC approached the ITAT. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ITAT held:</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Refusal of the various agencies<font color="#FF0000"><strong> not </strong></font>to accept change in character in PAN details filed by deductee in its correction statement was not correct and justifiable. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The system is erroneous to the extent if it restricts the deductor to revise its TDS return/statement within some corners which in this case was correction of PAN details subject to change of two alpha and two numerical characters and, therefore, correction statement filed by the assessee needs to be accepted after ascertaining the correctness of the correct PAN furnished by the deductor. </font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Please see Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax - <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/caseLawDet.php?QoPmnXyZ=MTA4OTQ5" target="_blank">2015-TIOL-1998-ITAT-AHM </a></strong></font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It seems that even in cases where the PAN is corrected (four or less character cases), the corrections are not carried out for the deductor and he is still asked to pay 20% TDS! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Paying tax is not all that an easy proposition in India. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">There is no such problem in Central Excise for they don't allow correction of returns! </font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em><font color="#006600">Excise Duty on Petrol hiked </font></em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>GOVERNMENT</strong> has hiked the excise duty on petrol and diesel with effect from 2 nd January 2016 </font></p>
<table width="90%" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0">
<tr valign="top" bgcolor="#FF9966">
<td width="7%"><div align="left"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Sl. No. </font></strong></div></td>
<td width="21%"><div align="left"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Chapter or heading or sub-heading or tariff item of the First Schedule </font></strong></div></td>
<td width="42%"><div align="left"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Description of excisable goods </font></strong></div></td>
<td width="15%"><div align="left"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Existing Rate </font></strong></div></td>
<td width="15%"><div align="left"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rate w.e.f <br>
<font color="#FF0000">02 01 2016</font> </font></strong></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td><div align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1)</font></strong></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2)</font></strong></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3)</font></strong></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(4)</font></strong></div></td>
<td><div align="center"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(5)</font></strong></div></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td rowspan="3"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">70 </font></strong></td>
<td rowspan="3"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2710</font></td>
<td colspan="3"><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Motor spirit commonly known as petrol,- </font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(i) intended for sale without a brand name; </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 7.36 per litre </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 7.73 per litre </font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(ii) other than those specified at (i) </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs.8.54per litre </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs.8.91 per litre </font></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td rowspan="3"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>71</strong></font></td>
<td rowspan="3"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2710 19 30 </font></td>
<td colspan="3"><div align="center"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">High speed diesel (HSD),- </font></div></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(i) intended for sale without a brand name; </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 5.83 per litre </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 7.83 per litre </font></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(ii) other than those specified at (i) </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 8.19 per litre </font></td>
<td><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Rs. 10.19per litre </font></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Retail prices are not going to be affected - only government wants to take advantage of the low crude price, not the refinery, not the consumer.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTg5OTg=" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification 01/2016-CE., Dated: January 01, 2016</font></strong></a></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em><font color="#006600">CENVAT Credit on Courier Imports - CENVAT Credit Rules Amended </font></em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><em>A</em></strong><em> certificate issued by an appraiser of Customs in respect of goods imported through a </em></font><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">Foreign Post Office</font></em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">, is a document prescribed under Rule 9 sub-rule (1), clause (d) of the CENVAT Credit Rules for taking CENVAT Credit.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now this is amended to include an </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">authorised courier</font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">. The Clause now reads as, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A certificate issued by an appraiser of Customs in respect of goods imported through a Foreign Post Office or, as the case may be, an Authorized Courier, registered with the Principal Commissioner of Customs or the Commissioner of Customs in-charge of the customs airport. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/notDesc.php?MpoQSrPnM=MTg5ODg=" target="_blank"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No. 27/2015- CX (N.T), Dated: December 31, 2015 </font></strong></a></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why this amendment? What is the document for taking credit on inputs imported through Courier? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's a rather long story.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This has been a question haunting the assessees for long. A typical doubt runs like this: </font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">We are receiving imported inputs through courier agencies and they are clearing our consignment along with other consigments under single bill of entry on their own and deliver to us after collecting the duty amount and their charges. They are issuing a consolidated statement in xerox showing the details of duty paid on behalf of us at the time of delivery, along with a copy of the Bill of Entry. Our question is whether we can claim CENVAT credit based on the said document issued by the Courier. </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In several places, Audit has raised objection and Department has dutifully confirmed demands when credit was taken on the courier bills of entry. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board had issued a clarification in 2007 (<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2007/cuscir07_31.htm" target="_blank"><strong>31/2007 - Cus, Dated: August 29, 2007</strong> </a>) in response to a representation from Express Industry Council of India (EICI) on the difficulties being faced by them in availment of CENVAT Credit on Courier Bill of Entry. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board clarified that <em>whenever consignee intends to take CENVAT credit on imported goods, normal Bill of Entry <strong>may</strong> be filed. This Bill of Entry <strong>may</strong> be used by the importer for taking CENVAT credit on any imported goods, as per clause (c) of rule (9) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. </em></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board did not clarify as to what a normal (and what an abnormal) bill of entry is. Anyway the Board Circular came in handy to overzealous officers to deny credit. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The CESTAT in a case decided in March 2015<em> CCE Vs Interface Microsystems -<strong> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/caseLawDet.php?QoPmnXyZ=MTA5NzYy" target="_blank">2016-TIOL-34-CESTAT-DEL</a></strong></em>, held, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><em><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In this case, the first issue is for denial of Cenvat credit on the strength of consolidated Courier Bills of Entry. As per Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, Cenvat credit is available on the strength of bill of entry and in the said rules there is no classification of bills of entry. The classification made by the Revenue is imaginary in the Courier Bill of Entry, an Ordinary Bill of entry or a Special Bill of Entry. It is not in dispute that respondent has taken the Cenvat credit on the strength of Courier Bills of Entry. Therefore, I hold that the Courier Bill of Entry is a specified document as per Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 . </font></em></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Instead of solving the problem that the Board created in 2007, they seem to have contributed substantially to continued litigation. Now the amended rule insists on getting a certificate from an appraiser, which is easier said than done. And the field will revive all the old cases and insist that courier bill of entry is not a valid document and credit taken on that is improper. </font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="3" face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"><strong><em><font color="#006600">Brilliant Order passed by young Assistant Commissioner Ruchi Bisht </font></em></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THIS </strong>column cannot end today without expressing its unbounded admiration for a bold and brilliant order passed by a young IRS officer on the issue of credit on courier bill of entry. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">During the course of audit, it was observed that the assessee had availed CENVAT credit on the basis of combined courier bills of entry and in terms of the clarification issued by the CBEC in Circular No.No.31/2007 (Customs) dated 29-08-2007, the assessee was required to file Normal Bill of Entry, which serves as the document for claiming CENVAT. Thus, it is alleged that combined courier bills of entry on the basis of which the cenvat credit was availed by the assessee was not the valid document for the purpose of availing cenvat credit in terms of Rule 9 of the CCR, 2004. On this ground, the cenvat credit availed by the assessee was treated as inadmissible and its recovery was proposed along with interest and invoking penal provisions. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Assistant CommissionerRuchiBisht who adjudicated this case did not agree. She observed, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">On going through the relevant provisions of Rule 9(1)(a) to Rule 9(1)(g) of CCR, 2004, I find that the said provisions actually describe the type of documents on the basis of which the cenvat credit shall be taken by the manufacturer or output service provider. I find that sub-rule 9(1) c of the said Rule prescribes " a bill of entry" as the valid document for availing cenvat credit. I also find there are no restrictions under the said Rule with regard to type of bill of entry for the purpose of availing cenvat credit. I also find that the expression "a bill of entry" occurring under the said Rule 9(1)(c) does not limit the scope of a document for imported goods to an original or duplicate copy of normal bill of entry and also that a bill of entry filed through a courier was not covered under Rule 9(1 )(c) of the Cenvat Rules. I would also like mention the provisions of sub-rule (2) of Rule 9 ibid which prescribes particulars to be contained in these documents to make them valid documents for availing the cenvat credit. …… </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">From the above legal provisions, </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#FFFF00" span="span">it is amply clear that if the document contains basic details about duty payment, description of goods and if the goods covered under the said document are duly received and accounted for in the books of account of the receiver, the cenvat credit may be allowed even if the other requisite details are not available in the said document . </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">I would also like to go through the CBEC circular in question which is the only pillar on which the present show cause notice is based...</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">From the plain reading of the above CBEC circular it clearly emerges that the same is of clarificatory nature. The word "may' used therein also suggests that there was no compulsive restrictions imposed for use of combined courier bill of entry for availing cenvat credit thereon. I also find that there is no mention in this circular that a normal bill of entry was the only document that could be allowed under Rule 9(1)(c) of the Cenvat Rules for taking cenvat credit. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">Since no dispute has been raised in the impugned show cause, it is also an admitted fact that the concerned imported goods were brought in their factory, they were accounted for in the books of accounts and they were used in relation to manufacture of final products cleared from factory on payment of appropriate excise duties by the said assessee. Thus, I find that all the basic ingredients of the Cenvat Scheme were fulfilled in this case.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">Thus, from the above provisions and facts of the case; I find that as clarified by the Board, the normal bill of entry may have been used by the assessee for the purpose of availing cenvat credit instead of the combined courier bills of entry. However, considering the facts that the basic ingredients of the Cenvat Scheme were fulfilled in this case, there was only a procedural lapse on the part of the assessee for not filing the normal bills of entry for availing the benefit of cenvat credit in terms of the clarification given by CBEC. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"style="background-color:#DFF3CB" span="span">I have no hesitation to hold that since all other provisions substantially complied with by the said assessee, there was no contravention on their part as alleged in the notice on hand and they were eligible to avail the cenvat credit in question on the basis of combined courier bills of entry being admissible to them. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is the kind of orders that you expect from judicious officers. Ruchi Bisht is a 2010 batch IRS officer and she passed this order in 2013. It is really a brave and brilliant order from a young officer. She could have taken the normal path and confirmed the demand, but this young lady has passed an order that would stand judicial scrutiny. Very rarely you would see such ‘speaking orders' from Departmental officers. Actually such officers are the real assets of the department and the Nation as they contribute to avoidance of unnecessary litigation and waste of time and money of the department, the trade and the Courts. DDT wishes Ruchi Bishta bright and successful career in the department; we need more officers like her.</font></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p><strong><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice day.</font></strong></p>
<p><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>