TIOL-DDT 733 · 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><font color="#663399" size="2"><b><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL-DDT 733</font></b><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b></b></font></font><font size="2"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><br>
02.11.2007<br>
Friday</b> </font></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Finally SHE Cess accounting codes are here! 2% cess is named as Primary Education Cess.</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The
long wait is over. The accounting codes for the Secondary and Higher Education
Cess for Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax are here. All these days,
these amounts were kept in "Receipt Awaiting Transfer to the other Minor
Head etc" under the respective Major Heads. The Controller General of
Accounts has approved operation of new Minor Head "505-Secondary and
Higher Education Cess" under the Major Head "0037-Customs",
0038-Union Excise Duty" & "0044 - Service Tax" . The Numeric
Code, Serial Codes and SCCD Codes are given Below:-</font></p>
<div align="justify">
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable">
<tr>
<td>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Numeric
Code </strong></font></p></td>
<td>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Description</strong></font></p></td>
<td>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Sl.
Code </strong></font></p></td>
<td>
<p align="center" class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>SCCD
Code </strong></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">0037<br>
003700505</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">00370050501</font></p></td>
<td>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Customs<br>
Secondary and Higher Education Cess<br>
Deduct Refunds </font></p></td>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">00370068</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">00370069</font></p></td>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">116</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">113</font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">0038<br>
003803<br>
003803505</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">00380350501</font></p></td>
<td>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Union
Excise Duty Non-Shareable Duties Secondary and Higher Education Cess<br>
<br>
Deduct Refunds & Drawback </font></p></td>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">00380115</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
00380116</font></p></td>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">110</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
119</font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">0044<br>
004400505</font></p></td>
<td>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Service
Tax<br>
Secondary and Higher Education Cess<br>
Tax Collection<br>
Other Receipts<br>
Deduct Refunds </font></p></td>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">00440426<br>
00440427<br>
00440428</font></p></td>
<td>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">110<br>
111<br>
118</font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Further,
it is intimated that the nomenclature of the minor head 504-Education Cess'
inserted vide correction slip No.532 dated 07.12.2004 has been changed as
'504-Primary Education Cess'. However their accounting codes will remain
same.</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=31&filename=notification/excise/2007/she.htm" target="_blank">Pr. Chief Controller of Accounts letter COORD/13-6/98-99/Vol.IV/454 Dated : October 4, 2007</a></u></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Ban on export of Rice - one day relaxation by DGFT - But, why only one day? </b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In
DDT 720, we reported "Now the DGFT has issued a notification prohibiting
export of rice other than basmati rice - and retrospectively with effect
from 9.10.2007. Can the DGFT retrospectively prohibit export? What happens
to exports already made from 9<sup>th</sup> to 15<sup>th</sup> October? </font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In
fact, on 19<sup>th</sup> October, the DGFT had clarified that the ban shall
not be applicable to consignments already handed over to Customs for examination
and subsequent exports upto Public Notice / Notification date. </font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now,
the DGFT has amended this Notification [38(RE-2007)/2004-09] to the effect
that the ban will apply with effect from 10.10.2007 instead of the original
date i.e. 9.10.2007. But why only one day? When the Notification was issued
on 15<sup>th</sup> October how can they expect the exporters to comply with
the conditions of the Notification from 10<sup>th</sup> October? </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=45&filename=notification/dgft/2007/dgft07not044.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Notification 44 (RE - 2007)/2004-2009, Dated: October 30, 2007</a></u></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A day after the above Notification, another Notification dated 31<sup>st</sup> October has been issued by the DGFT in relation to export of Rice. This Notification also amends the 38(RE-2007)/2004-2009, dated 15.10.2007 as under:</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.3 Further, the prohibition imposed by this Notification shall not be applicable to the export of non-basmati rice if the Minimum Export Price (MEP) is more than US$ 425 per ton FOB.</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.3.1 The above MEP shall also not be applicable to:-</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(a) Exports of non-basmati rice for which letter of credit has been opened till 09.10.2007; and</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(b) Rice brought into the port godowns for export till 10.10.2007, as certified by port authorities." </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=45&filename=notification/dgft/2007/dgft07not045.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Notification 45 (RE - 2007)/2004-2009, Dated: October 30, 2007</a></u></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The original<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2007/dgft07not038.htm" target="_blank"> Notification of 38(RE-2007)/ 2004-2009</a> has been amended five times in last 15 days. Imagine the confusion in the trade and Industry. Can't a Notification be drafted in one go taking all factors into consideration together? Just see the list...</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notn 40 Amended entry at Sl No 45AA</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notn 42 Inserted a new para 2.1</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notn 43 Inserted a new para 2.2</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notn 44 effective date has been amended to 10.10.2007</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notn 45 Inserted a new para 2.3</font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Bangalore follows Hyderabad - Declared as A1-class city</b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">While reporting the upgradation of <st1:City w:st="on">Hyderabad to A1 class city, <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=6010" target="_blank">TIOL-DDT 691 </a>had asked "What about cities like <ST2:CITY u1:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Bangalore</ST2:CITY>, <ST2:CITY u1:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Ahmadabad and Pune, which richly deserve the status that has been granted to <ST2:CITY u1:st="on"><ST2:PLACE u1:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Hyderabad</ST2:PLACE></ST2:CITY>? In fact, an angry Bangalorite questioned <b><font color="#663399">Why discriminate <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Bangalore and other cities?</font> </b>Here is some happy news for Central Government employees in <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Bangalore too. Consequent upon re-constitution of the area of Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and re-naming it as Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike with the addition of certain areas within its Municipal limits vide Notification no. UDD 92 MNY 2006 dated 16.01.2007 of the Government of Karnataka, the population of 'Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagsra Palike' has increased, and therefore qualifies for classification as 'A-1' class city The city has been declared as A 1 grade city for the purpose of House Rent Allowance/Compensatory (City) Allowance -with effect from 1st October 2007.</font></p>
<p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">When the city qualified on 16.01.2007, why the HRA should be enhanced only from 1<sup>st</sup> October 2007? </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=70&filename=pitara/oms/bang2.htm" target="_blank">OFFICE MEMORANDUM No. 2(6)/2007-E.II(B) - Dated : September 21, 2007</a></u></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Gutka in news again - DGCEI arrests promoter of Gutka units</b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGCEI has arrested the promoter of Kurele Paan Products, <st1:City w:st="on">Ghaziabad and Kurele Fragrance Pvt Ltd, <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Kanpur for alleged evasion of duty and not responding to summons. Amid high drama with the accused taking shelter in a hospital on health grounds, the Magistrate himself visted the hospital along with the counsels and has ordered a judicial remand of 15 days.<strong><br>
( <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=6303" target="_blank">See more in breaking news.<ns0:PersonName><ns1:Sn></ns1:Sn></ns0:PersonName></a><ns0:PersonName><ns1:Sn>)</ns1:Sn></ns0:PersonName></strong><ns0:PersonName><ns1:Sn></ns1:Sn></ns0:PersonName></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>From our Legal Corner - Monday's cases</b></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><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></b></font></b></font></strong></font></b></font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
<b><font color="#FF0000">Income Tax </font></b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Income from house property - notional interest on advance cannot be added to determine ALV; No deduction of expenditure to collect rent when there was no expenditure : ITAT </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The assessee had let out a commercial space on an annual rent of Rs.25,30,800/- and has also received an amount of Rs.25,30,800/- as interest free security. The Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the security deposit received by the assessee was an advantage accruing to the assessee as a result of letting out of the property so it was to be taken into consideration for determining the ALV of the property in terms of Section 23 of the Income Tax Act. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Customs</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#663399">Customs - imported vegetable oil not conforming to standards - liable for confiscation - Tribunal has power to order reprocessing and clearance if found fit - prohibited goods cannot be cleared under bond u/s 143 : Bombay HC </font></b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The common question of law raised in all the writ petitions is:-</font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of adjudication and directing the customs authorities to allow reprocessing of the confiscated goods and thereafter allow clearance for home consumption, if the reprocessed goods are found to conform to the standard prescribed under the 1954 Act and the rules made thereunder? <u1:p></u1:p></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF0000" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Central Excise </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Cost of duty paid bought out items cleared with CPU, no includible in assessable value : CESTAT </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399">THE </font></strong>appellant company was manufacturing and clearing Central Processing Units (CPU). They were also supplying certain bought out item as per the customers' requirement. The appellant's contention is that they had not taken modvat credit in respect of bought out items and such bought out items were of reputed company and were already bearing brand name. Therefore, in terms of the customers requirement such bought out items were supplied. The appellants contend that these bought out items did not form part of the CPU supplied by them to their customers. Therefore, the value of bought out items was not required to be added, as claimed by the department</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><u>See our columns Monday for the judgements</u></b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday 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>