Legal Corner Icon — the image was hosted by the publisher and was not captured.Jurisprudentiol – tomorrow's cases

By Vijay Kumar

Income Tax

Film Production - deduction of the cost of production of the film is to be allowed to the extent of the amount realized during the number of days of commercial exhibition in that year and the balance has to be allowed in the next year - Supreme Court

That if a film is not released for exhibition on a commercial basis at least 180 days before the end of such previous year, the cost of production of the film insofar as it does not exceed the amount realized by the film producer by exhibiting the film on a commercial basis, is to be allowed as a deduction in computing the profits and gains of such previous year and the balance, if any, is to be carried forward to the next following previous year and allowed as a deduction in that year.

Customs

Vodafone Essar seems to be on the path to victory – Stay granted in Rs 9.7 Cr Customs case by Tribunal

The excise guys had their fill when it came to charging Central Excise duty on the erected BTS/BSC Cell sites [ 2008-TIOL-208-CESTAT-MUM ] – they lost their case all through!

Now, it is the turn of the Customs officials – seems to be. The relevant facts are that the applicants imported mobile telephone equipment viz. Base Trans-receiver Station (BTS), Base Station Controller (BSC) and Mobile Switching Centre (MSC) falling under Chapter Heading 85.17 of the Customs Tariff Act. It is alleged by the revenue authorities that the applicants suppressed the fact that these equipments contained software essential for these equipments so as to avoid duty on the value component of the software.

The adjudicating authority did the needful – the duty held payable Rs.9.73 crores & Rs.1 crore for redeeming the confiscated equipments.

Service Tax

All activities of C&F agent are not covered under C&F service – Revenue appeal dismissed: High Court

THE revenue has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 20-6-2005 passed by the CESTAT raising the following substantial questions of law :-

(i) Whether the service provided by M/s. United Plastomers, Amristar to M/s. IPCL as dealer/ commission agent is covered under the ‘clearing and Forwarding Agent Service' as defined under Section 65 of the Act as any person who is engaged in providing any service, either directly or indirectly, connected with the clearing and forwarding operations in any manner to any other person and includes a consignment agent?

(ii) Whether the penalty is imposable when the party deposits the service tax before the issue of the show cause notice after department has caught them for non-payment of service tax?”

See our columns tomorrow for the judgements