Jurispruden tiol – Tomorrow ' s cases Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.
Income Tax
Settlement applications not to abate on 31 st March 2008 - It cannot be that only the Petitioners and other citizens are bound by the law, but the Settlement Commission and the Central Government are not bound by the law. Such a situation would lead to anarchy, and a situation whereby the rule of law is effectively disabled. – High Court
Please recall wherein we had reported the Vatika case, where the High Court wanted to wait and see if the Settlement Commission could dispose of all the pending cases before 31.3.2008. Now it is clear that the Commission could not, there are more than a hundred writ petitions before the High Court.
So in continuation of the previous order, the High Court has now passed an order holding that the March 31 2008 deadline does not hold.
Income Tax
amount already paid should be adjusted against tax demand - The State cannot recover or hold back any tax except in accordance with law for otherwise it would be unjustly enriching itself, which is clearly impermissible – State should not raise technical objections to defeat a claim - High Court
The State should not raise technical pleas for the sake of it and to defeat a just claim. In the present case, we feel that the Revenue has raised a plea of maintainability only to obfuscate the real issue and to deny to the Assessee what is legitimately due to it. This is unfortunate.
The State cannot recover or hold back any tax except in accordance with law for otherwise it would be unjustly enriching itself, which is clearly impermissible. The Revenue having received and accepted the amount paid by the Assessee for the relevant financial years was under an obligation to give credit to the Assessee for the payments already made or appropriated against those very financial years. Otherwise the liability of the Assessee would be unreasonably increased and the Assessee would be required to pay tax and interest twice over (or at least a part thereof) which is clearly unconscionable.
Central Excise
Hanging cards on which razor blades are fixed are prima facie cenvatable – Tribunal grants waiver of pre-deposit & stays recovery
NEARLY Twenty three lakhs is the Cenvat credit involved in this appeal filed by the “razor blade” manufacturing company. Down South, “blade company” is a slang for companies that promise lucrative returns on your investments & one fine day they perform the vanishing act!
Anyways, we are not reporting anything about such “blade companies” but a company that has been in the field of “razor blade” manufacturing since the day we attained puberty!
The issue involved in this case is denial of modvat/cenvat credit on the hanging cards on which razor blades are fitted. The applicants availed the modvat/cenvat credit on such cards. It is the contention of the Revenue that credit on such card is not available since they are not packing material but only display cards.
The original authority had called for this product and on verifying the credentials dropped the proceedings initiated. On an appeal by the Revenue, the Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the decision.
With a stub, the assessee is before the CESTAT.
Until Tomorrow with more DDT
Have a nice day.
Mail your comments to vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com