TIOL-DDT 80 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<html> <head> <title>Untitled Document</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#0000CC" size="3">TIOL-DDT 80</font><br> 23 03 2005<br> Wednesday</b></font></p> <p align="center"><b><font color="#009933" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Anti Dumping Duty on Mica Pearl</font></b></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anti Dumping Duty has been imposed on Mica pearl pigment excluding cosmetic and automotive grade originating from EU or USA.<br> <br> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2005/ctariff05_030.htm">NOTIFICATION NO. 30/2005-CUSTOMS, Dated: March 21, 2005</a><br> <br> <b><font color="#009933">No Advice Notes to Banks for IT refunds less than Rs.25000/-</font></b><br> <br> With a view to improve Taxpayers service, the CBDT has decided to discontinue the system of sending Advice Notes to the bank separately in cases of refunds up to Rs. 24,999/-. Under the new system, no Advice Note would be generated for refund orders up to an amount of Rs. 24,999/-. For refund orders of Rs. 25,000/- and above, one Advice Note would be made, which would be sent to the Main Branch of State Bank of India. One counterfoil of the refund cheque would continue to be retained by the assessing officer for all refunds issued by him regardless of the amount of refund. All refunds of Rs. 25,000/- and above will now be drawn on only the Main Branch of State Bank of India. The order branches in any station will handle refunds only up to Rs. 24,999/-.<br> <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=36&filename=notification/cbdt/2005/instruct01.htm">INSTRUCTION NO. 1/2005, Dated : March 18, 2005 (CBDT)</a><br> <br> <b><font color="#009933">Departmental appeals – an empty formality?<br> </font></b><br> Today, we are carrying a Supreme Court order where the Chief Commissioner of Customs has been directed to enquire as to who was responsible for the inordinate delay of 864 days in filing an SLP before the Apex Court. The conviction of a Tanzanian National was set aside by the High Court and the department took the case to the Supreme Court – after 864 days. Assume that the Supreme Court quashes the High Court order. What happens? The Tanzanian must have happily gone back to his country. Can the Customs bring him back? If so, at what cost? Is it all necessary? How are they going to trace him? If the appeal could not be filed for more than two years, what was the need to file it and get the rap from the Apex Court? The Supreme Court now wants to find out who was responsible for the delay. But should not the Government find out who was responsible for fighting this already lost battle? After 864 days they should have realized that there was no point in filing an SLP. <br> <br> The only important and original work in the department is causing litigation or defending in litigation and that is given the least importance. The last time any importance is given to a case is at the time of drafting the Show Cause Notice; after that the case just drifts along and ultimately reaches the Apex Court, by which time it is an orphan and nobody really comes forward even to adopt it. If a case is worth being taken to the Supreme Court, it is certainly worth being well taken care of – at the highest levels. But the protocol for a visiting dignitary is far more important than a case pending in Supreme Court! <br> <br> In this particular case, the Supreme Court has observed that there is more than what meets the eye and that matter was deliberately delayed by interested persons in the Department. Actually it may only be a case of lethargy and not interest – it may be lack of interest! As the Supreme Court had observed in this case, this is not the first time that the Supreme Court has come across such cases. More than five years ago, in <b>Commissioner vs Mathew Kurian, the Supreme Court observed,</b><br> <br> <b>cases are invariably filed with enormous unexplained/casually explained delay. This state of affairs is continuing for quite some years. We wish to express our anguish that in spite of the Court pointing out the haphazard way of filing application for condoning delay, no improvement is forthcoming. Ultimately it is the Revenue that suffers as a result of dismissal of cases on the ground of delay. We hope that at least in future the appeals are filed in time and if there is any delay, it is explained properly.</b><br> <br> Obviously nothing has changed. <br> <br> <font color="#009933"><b>Protocol – a former British PM and a present Chief Commissioner</b></font><br> <br> Last week a Chief Commissioner (A DG actually) visited a small town. He was received at the Air Port by FOUR Commissioners. They drove from Air Port to Hotel, and waiting at the Hotel were another set of officers in uniform and the hotel staff with bouquets. From the Hotel he went to the office and was received by lady officers with flowers. Incidentally on the same day, the former British Prime Minister, John Major visited the city to attend a function organised by a charitable organisation. It was a low key affair and people came to know about it only from the next day's papers. Those who interacted with him at the place had a pleasant experience in seeing a down to earth man in him. When the District Collector presented a bouquet to him, he commented “<b>OUR HABITS ARE STILL CONTINUING HERE THOUGH WE HAVE GIVEN THEM UP IN OUR SOIL".</b><br> <br> <b><font color="#FF0000">Until Tomorrow with more of DDT<br> <br> Have a Nice Day<br> <br> Mail your comments to</font></b> <b>vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com </b></font></p> </body> </html>