TIOL-DDT 630 · 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>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="3"><b><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL-DDT 630</font></b></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><br>
07.06.2007<br>
Thursday</b></font></p>
<p align=center><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Removal of port restrictions on import of Tea from Sri Lanka – Notification and CBEC instructions</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As per Notification No. 60/200 – cus dated 12.5.2000, Tea imported from Sri Lanka up to 15 million kilograms enjoys a concessional rate of duty subject the condition that the imports take place through the ports of Mumbai, Kolkata, Cochin and Visakhapatnam.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the port restrictions are deleted, which means it can be imported through any port. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the Board clarifies that the monitoring mechanism for Tariff Rate quota (TRQ) imports of tea from Sri Lanka under ISLFTA was agreed in the meeting held between the Government of India and Government of Sri Lanka on 18-19 April 2000. The said monitoring mechanism shall continue even after removal of port restrictions for import of tea from Sri Lanka under ISLFTA.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Board wants Chief Commissioners to direct all officials under their charge to strictly comply with the monitoring mechanism. Chief Commissioners shall also forward details of imports of tea under ISLFTA to the Directorate General of Systems, Customs & Central Excise, New Delhi. Customs ports having EDI facility shall provide the information to DG, Systems online, while non-EDI locations may do so electronically. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><u><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2007/ctariff07_075.htm" target="_blank">NOTIFICATION NO.75/2007-Cus</a></u><b><u> and </u></b><u><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2007/cuscir07_22.htm" target="_blank">CBEC CIRCULAR NO. 22/2007-Cus., Dated: June 5, 2007</a></u></font></p>
<p align=center><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Specific officers appointed to adjudicate DRI cases</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">CBEC has appointed certain Commissioners to adjudicate certain specified DRI cases</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2007/cnt07_056.htm" target="_blank">NOTIFICATION NO. 56</a> , <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2007/cnt07_057.htm" target="_blank">57</a> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2007/cnt07_058.htm" target="_blank">58</a> , <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2007/cnt07_059.htm" target="_blank">59</a> , <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2007/cnt07_060.htm" target="_blank">60</a> <strong>and</strong> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2007/cnt07_061.htm" target="_blank">61/2007-Cus., (N.T.), Dated: June 5, 2007</a></font></p>
<p align=center><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Review by committee of Commissioners - a disservice to the cause of justice? </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Who says two heads are better than one? At least in Revenue and especially in Review, it is not so. DDT</b> today brings you some excerpts from a scholarly judgement delivered by the Chennai CESTAT.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>The brief facts:</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti-dumping duty was leviable, at the material time, on mulberry raw silk of Chinese origin of grade 2A and below. This duty was not leviable on the higher grades. The importer declared the goods to be of grades 6A/4A. This declaration was accepted without any test for grade of the goods and the assessments were completed on that basis. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now the acidic remarks of the Tribunal:-</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ Later on, in a manner reminiscent of the legendary lotus-eaters, the department dreams of the importer having imported mulberry raw silk of Chinese origin, of grade 2A and below, and clamps on them a case of evasion of AD duty.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The adjudicating authority also dances to its tune, oblivious or regardless of the reality that the quality of the imported raw silk, in terms of grade to be ascertained, was determinative of the question whether the commodity was subject to AD duty. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The Deputy Commissioner thinks that the importer had agreed to minimal enhancement of value of the goods with intent to evade payment of AD duty.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ He rejects the assessee’s submission that they had not given their consent for such enhancement of value and that the department had <i>suomotu </i>loaded the value. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ The episode ends with the Deputy Commissioner confirming the demand of AD duty against the party. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ We would rather say that the episode has been given befitting burial by the appellate Commissioner. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ <b>But, to the dismay of any prudent man, a committee of two Commissioners has exhumed the buried. </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">++ We must lose no time to re-bury it.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Tribunal had some good words about the Commissioner(Appeals),</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But, before doing it, we would like to reproduce herein the relevant part of the appellate Commissioner’s order, which, eminently enough, <b>deals a blow on the arbitrary and vexatious adjudication proceedings, disposes of the case with the judiciousness expected of an appellate authority and serves to guide the department for the future.</b> </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Commissioner(Appeals) had held,</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“I find that the appellants had declared the grade of the Mulberry Silk yarn imported by them as 4A/6A, but the department was apparently unsure of whether the grade declared was correct or whether it could be 2A but did not want to test a sample and have managed to coax the appellants to accept enhancement of value to USD 21.40/21.37 per Kg. under the mistaken notion that by enhancing the value accordingly, revenue would be safeguarded and anti-dumping duty would no longer be imposable. It has to be borne in mind that the liability for anti-dumping duty would arise only if the goods are <u>definitely</u> of 2A grade or below and the department’s suspicion that the goods <u>might</u> be 2A grade and loading the value on such wrong presumption, and the assumption that it would take care of revenue is highly irregular. If at all there was any inkling or reason to believe that the goods are of 2A grade instead of that declared, the goods should have been subjected to rigorous examination by way of drawl of samples and testing to ascertain if the goods were mis-declared and the matter should have been adjudicated. However, by loading the value without concrete evidence merely based on unproven suspicion, the department is vulnerable to the charge of arbitrariness and this has vitiated the entire adjudication proceedings. The non-testing of the sample of the imported goods in this regard is inexplicable, and without the test report the whole case fails. An order based on assumptions and presumptions without an iota of evidence is bad in law. The remedy in this case did not lie in a SHOW CAUSE NOTICE to the importer but may have to be searched for elsewhere. <b>Senior supervisory officers may like to look into the whole matter, so that such a situation is not repeated.”</b></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><U1:P></U1:P></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Senior supervisory officers did look into the matter and found that the Commissioner(Appeals) was wrong and so they decided to file an appeal with the Tribunal and invited its stinging comments. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Tribunal observed, </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">To review the above order is, by all means, a disservice to the cause of justice. It is sad that the crucial fact that the goods was not tested for its grade for AD duty purposes did not weigh with the Review Committee.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See this order in </font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=52&filename=legal/cestat/2007/2007-TIOL-747-CESTAT-MAD.htm">2007-TIOL-747-CESTAT-MAD</a></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b></b></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font size="2">From our Legal Corner</font></b></font>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><b><b><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_31.gif" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="191" height="160" hspace="5" border="0" align="left"></b></b><font color="#663399">India International Centre is not a Mandap Keeper – CESTAT</font></b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Commencement of Insurance Business - If no policy was sold, benefits of Sec 44 cannot be allowed - Expenses also not allowable on same ground - Interest income to be taxed under head 'Income from other sources' : ITAT</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Over invoicing of DEPB exports - Tribunal referring to party's arguments came to abrupt conclusion without discussing how detailed order of Commissioner was erroneous - Matter remanded by Supreme Court </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><u>See our columns tomorrow for these judgements</u></b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Tomorrow with more DDT</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice day.</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@taxindiaonline.com">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com</a></font></p>
</body>
</html>