TIOL-DDT 847 · 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 size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 847 </font><br>
17.04.2008 <br>
Thursday </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Tariff Value of Brass scrap increased </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Tariff value of brass scrap has been increased from 4276 US Dollars to 4422 dollars. There is no change in the Tariff Values of other items. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Notification No. 37/2008- Customs( NT) , Dated the 16 th April, 2008 </strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Actual User Condition for import of Sugar under Advance Authorisation Scheme – DGFT clarifies </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In case of Advance Authorisation wherein the input allowed is Raw Sugar, a special dispensation was allowed vide CBEC letter No. 605/68/2004- DBK dated 21.9.2004, thereby allowing sale of duty free imported raw sugar even before fulfilment of export obligation. The export obligation was allowed to be fulfilled in such cases by the Advance Authorisation holders on ‘ton-to-ton' basis instead of ‘grain-to-grain' basis required under FTP. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This facility is withdrawn with immediate effect for any import of raw sugar against advance licences / authorizations from 16.4.2008. </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=46&filename=notification/dgft/2008/dgft08cir001.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Policy Circular No. 2 (RE-08)/2004-2009 Dated: April 16, 2008 </a></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Prohibition on export of cement – not to apply to supplies to SEZ </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Export Policy on Cement is – prohibited; but this will not apply to supplies of Cement from Domestic Tariff Area ( DTA ) to units in Special Economic Zone( SEZ ) or SEZ Developers/Co-Developers for use within the SEZ only. </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=45&filename=notification/dgft/2008/dgft08not005.htm" target="_blank">DGFT Notification No. 5(RE-2008)/2004-2009 Dated : 15 TH APRIL, 2008 </a></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Direct Receipt of Import Bills / Documents for Import of Rough Precious & Semi-Precious Stones – Liberalisation – RBI circular </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Gems and Jewellery Export Promotion Council ( GJEPC ) has represented that in order to reduce the transaction costs to the non-status holder exporters, the existing restrictions may be relaxed and the enhanced facility may also be extended for import of rough precious and semi-precious stones. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">RBI has decided, as a sector specific measure, to enhance the limit for direct receipt of import bills / documents from USD 100,000 to USD 300,000 in the case of import of rough precious and semi-precious stones by non-status holder exporters. Accordingly, AD Category - I banks may allow remittance for imports up to USD 300,000 where the importer of rough precious and semi-precious stones has received the import bills / documents directly from the overseas supplier and the documentary evidence for import is submitted by the importer at the time of remittance. AD Category - I banks may undertake such transactions subject to the following conditions : </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(i) The import would be subject to the prevailing Foreign Trade Policy. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(ii) The transactions are based on their commercial judgment and they are satisfied about the bonafides of the transactions. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(iii) AD Category-I banks should do the KYC and due diligence exercise and should be fully satisfied about the financial standing / status and track record of the importer customer. Before extending the facility, they should also obtain a report on each individual overseas supplier from the overseas banker or reputed credit agency overseas. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The directions contained in this circular have been issued under Sections 10(4) and 11(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999) and are without prejudice to permissions / approvals, if any, required under any other law. </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=49&filename=notification/rbi/2007/rbi07cir037.htm" target="_blank">RBI Circular No. 37/ RBI Dated : April 16 , 2008 </a></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Jurispruden <font color="#FF6633" size="5">tiol</font> – Monday'
s cases </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><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></font></strong></font></strong></font></strong></font></font><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Income Tax </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Mandatory audit could not be done by coop-society as govt did not appoint auditor - No penalty: High Court </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633">STRANGE</font> </strong>are the ways of Revenue. They took a Co-operative society to the High Court for not filing the audited report on time – the penalty involved – a huge sum of Rs 24,362/-! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">How much money the government must have spent for this and how much they made the poor society spend? Revenue is certainly not safe in the hands of the Revenue officers – they are always more worried about audit than revenue. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Central Excise </strong> </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Annual capacity of production – by the time order was passed on remand by CCE , Section 3A was omitted; secondly rule 3 is held ultra vires Section 3A – on both counts order unsustainable: Majority decision by Tribunal </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633">THE</font> </strong>issue involved is regarding the determination of the Annual Capacity of Production of a textile processor under the provisions of Section 3A of the CEA '44 & the Rules made there under. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is the contention of the appellant that the provisions of Section 3A are omitted from the statute w.e.f . 11.5.2001 and as such, the order passed by the Commissioner in March 2004 re-determining the capacity of the appellant is without jurisdiction; that the issue is no more res integra in view of Tribunal decision in the case of Mitra Steels and Alloys Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE , Raigad . <strong>[ </strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=52&filename=legal/cestat/2005/2005-TIOL-824-CESTAT-MUM.htm"><strong>2005-TIOL-824-CESTAT-MUM </strong></a><strong>] </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Central Excise </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Scrap sold in e-auction to highest bidder – Once scrap is cleared on payment of duty, company is no way concerned with whether consignment is delivered to destination reflected on invoice or diverted elsewhere; Amendment to rule 26 is prospective: Tribunal </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6633">IMAGINE</font> </strong> hounded by the department and drawn into litigation for no fault of yours. Apart from the time money that is spent in fighting the case, you ultimately conclude that there is no peace of mind even if you sell that “damn scrap” & that too in an auction on payment of Central Excise duty. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is what precisely happened in the present case. The appellant company conducted an e-auction for selling the scrap generated in the factory premises & sold the same to the highest bidder. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See
our columns on Monday for the judgements</strong> </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until Monday with more <strong>DDT </strong>(tomorrow is a holiday) </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice time. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" 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>