TIOL-DDT 985 · 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 bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 985 </font><br> 05.11.2008 <br> Wednesday </strong></font></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Anti Dumping Duty on Ceftriaxone Sodium Sterlite – Board cautions the field against unscrupulous importers </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification No.98 /2008-Customs dated 27th August, 2008 has been issued imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of Ceftriaxone Sodium Sterile, originating in, or exported from People's Republic of China and imported into India . </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Since the product in question is an antibiotic, the notification states that it is classifiable under tariff item 2941 90 90 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Information adduced by the DA during investigation indicates that the product is also being classifiable under Chapter heading 2942 in some Customs formations. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">If this is permitted, the Board feels, there is a likelihood that the anti-dumping duty would be circumvented by mis -declaring the goods in this manner. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So the Board wants the Chief Commissioners and Commissioners to ensure that the duty is not circumvented by unscrupulous importers by adopting this modus-operandi. </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2008/antidumping.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC's F.No.354 /166/2007- TRU Dated: September 01, 2008 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Exemption to Marble Slabs fixed with Fibre Net and/or coated with resin – Board clarifies </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">A question has arisen as to whether marble slabs on which resin and hardner are applied on one side and fibre net on the other side would be covered by the exemption under notification no.4 /06-CE dated 1.3.06. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The process of manufacture is that glass fibre net is applied on one side of the marble slabs to strengthen the slabs which are fragile and to enable safe handling and transportation. On the other side of this slab, polyester resin is applied to repair the cracks and pin holes in the slabs. The surface of the slabs still remains uneven as it was when it was cut or sawn. The glass fibre net is peeled off before fixing by the customer of finishing. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Board is of the view that <strong>when the marble slabs still have uneven surface </strong>as when it was cut or sawn, the application of glass fibre net or resin/ hardner on the marble slabs shall not take these marble slabs out of Chapter 25. Such marble slabs shall continue to be classified in Chapter 25 and the concessional rate of duty under notification no.4 /06-CE shall be available to them. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Again such an important clarification is contained in a private letter addressed to CCs and Commissioners. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Is this binding on the Commissioners? </font></p> <p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2008/marbleassessment.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>CBEC's F.No.134 /2/06- CX4 Dated: September 03, 2008 </strong></font></a></p> <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#006600">Jurispruden</font><font color="#FF6633" size="5">tiol</font><font color="#006600">– Tomorrow's cases</font></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><strong><strong><strong><strong><strong><strong><b><img src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/stories/ddt_hammer.jpg" alt="Legal Corner Icon" width="100" height="84" hspace="5" border="0" align="left"></b></strong></strong></strong></strong></strong></strong></strong></font><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>No reversal of CENVAT required during manufacture of Nitrogen gas as Oxygen gas released into atmosphere is not a ‘manufactured' product - Tribunal </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>YOU </strong> cannot but admire their resilience and the unflinching perseverant attitude. We are talking of Revenue and their gutsy spirit in fighting for a Rs 62 thousand case. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The adjudicating authority dropped the demand and the Revenue took their case to the Commissioner( Appeals) – they lost here too and so took their matter to the Tribunal. The respondent assessee chose to sit on the fence and watch the proceedings and hence gave their written submission and requested the Tribunal to decide the matter on merits. <strong><em>After all, it costs! As for the Revenue, filing an appeal is free! </em></strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><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>Amounts reimbursed in connection with feasibility study of airport project - Expenses incurred by non-resident company outside India with regard to services received from another non-resident company for feasibility study of project in India not subject to TDS: ITAT </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>BANGALORE </strong>International Airport Ltd (BIAL), Bangalore had to cross many hurdles in its race against time to come up with airport of International standards and finally became operational in May 2008. In the process, it also stumbled upon Income tax department and the objections with regard to reimbursement of pre-project expenses amounting to EUR 4.2 Million and Swiss Francs 6.1 Million. Before we proceed to understand the objections of the tax authorities, let us briefly appreciate the background and facts of the case. </font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Service Tax </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Penalty on revision when matter is under appeal - Commissioner, who imposes penalty for violation of Finance Act, violates his own Finance Act ... Commissioner's order premature: CESTAT </strong></font></p> <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>COMMISSIONERS … </strong>They are the top officers who administer the tax in the field. The Government and the Board repose a lot of faith and trust in them. The rhetoric Board Circulars routinely say “the Commissioners should ensure speedy disposal of refund claims …Commissioners should ensure no officer should contact the service tax assessee……Commissioners should…..etc etc”. But unfortunately all the Commissioners are not as well informed as the benign Board thinks. Take this case. The assessee is a service provider and there was a demand against him for non payment of service tax. The original authority demanded service tax for the period 2005-06 and 2006-07 and also imposed penalties under Section 77 and 78 of the Finance Act 1994. The assessee filed appeal against the said order and the matter is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) </font></p> <p align="justify"><strong><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">See our columns tomorrow for the judgements </font></strong></p> <p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until tomorrow with more<strong> DDT </strong></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>