TIOL-DDT 993 · 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 993</font><br>
17.11.2008<br>
Monday</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>For a self respecting man death is preferable to dishonour</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In a landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme Court on November 12, 2008 which we have carried yesterday [</font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="mailto:vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com" target="_blank">2008-TIOL-212-SC-COFEPOSA</a></strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">],
Justice Markandey Katju, an authority on Mimansa principles of interpretation,
allowed a Writ Petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging
a preventive detention order issued under COFEPOSA.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">While the State took an objection that the WP is premature as the detention order is yet to be executed to arrest the person against whom the order was passed, the Court took up the task of explaining the power of High Courts and the Supreme Court to set aside the preventive detention order at the pre-execution stage itself.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The importance of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution was highlighted thus:</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“It must be remembered that every person has a fundamental right of liberty vide Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21, which gives the right of life and liberty, is the most fundamental of all the Fundamental Rights in the Constitution. Though, no doubt, restrictions can be placed on these rights in the interest of public order, security of the State, etc. but they are not to be lightly transgressed”.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Then turning to Bhagavad Gita the Court observed Lord Krishna's sermon to Arjuna:</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“For a self respecting man, death is preferable to dishonour".</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Every lawyer must acknowledge that the law is not always logical at all.</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>For full text of the judgement see [</strong></font><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=50&filename=legal/sc/2008/2008-TIOL-212-SC-COFEPOSA.htm" target="_blank">2008-TIOL-212-SC- COFEPOSA</a></strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>] </strong>and see our story in <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=8154">Breaking News</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Cabinet Secretary reiterates instructions to strictly adhere to timelines</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In <strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=7963" target="_blank">DDT-965-dated-October 6,2008</a> </strong> we highlighted the plight of Cabinet Secretariat in not getting the notes from various Ministries/Departments for the meetings of the Cabinet/Cabinet Committees in time. We reported:</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">“The cabinet Secretariat had written several times to the Ministries/Departments that the notes for the Cabinet/Cabinet Committee will not be entertained unless these are circulated five clear working days in advance of the meeting of the Cabinet/Cabinet Committee. The instructions has also highlighted that, taking into account the time required for examination of the notes in the Cabinet Secretariat, only notes received seven working days before the scheduled meeting will be circulated for the meeting provided they meet with the procedural requirements.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In spite of repeated instructions, the Cabsec finds that notes for the consideration of the Cabinet/Cabinet Committees continue to be forwarded by the Ministries/Departments till the last day prior to the Cabinet meetings, leaving very little time for its examination and for ensuring its timely circulation by the Cabinet Secretariat ”</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It appears the D.O. letter issued by the Cabinet Secretary on September 25, 2008 did not have the desired effect. In the Cabinet Meeting held on October 30, 2008, the Prime Minister himself directed that all Ministries/Departments have to plan their activities in such a manner so as to obviate the necessity of untimely last minute requests for inclusion of notes for Cabinet's consideration. So, the embarrassed Cabinet Secretary has once again come out with fresh instructions reiterating the importance of adhering to the timelines prescribed in this regard and avoid last minute rush.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Cabinet Secretary is the highest ranking bureaucrat in the Country and it seems his directions to the senior bureaucrats in charge of various Ministries/Departments have fallen on deaf ears. This only highlights the gross indiscipline amongst the bureaucrats at the highest level in charge of various Ministries/Departments. “Yathaa Raja thathaa Praja” goes the age old saying. How can we expect anything better from the lower rungs of bureaucracy who interact with the public?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/cabinet_circular_do_letter.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Cabinet Secretariat D O No. 1/13/2/2008-Cab. Dated : November 03, 2008</strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Austerity measures in tough economic times</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In order to meet the objective of expenditure management in view of the current economy measures, the Government has directed all babus who wish to avail of LTC facility and are entitled to travel by Air, to avail of the cheapest economy fares irrespective of their entitlements.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The moot point is why are they allowed to travel by Air in these tough times and above all why is there an LTC? In the private sector when there are lay offs and employees are willing to take cuts on their fringe benefits and even pay checks to hang on to their jobs, Babus' austerity measures will go only thus far and no further. The Government should seriously consider asking half its employees to stay at home (with full pay of course) for some time to reduce unnecessary expenditure.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=pitara/6th_pay_commission/office_memorandum_20.htm" target="_blank"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Department of Expenditure Office Memorandum Dated: November 10, 2008</strong></font></a></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>One more location notified as ICD</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Government has notified Mandavariya (Kishangarh), in Ajmer District of Rajasthan as Inland Container Depot of ‘unloading of imported goods and loading of export goods'.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_117.htm" target="_blank">Customs Notification No. 117/2008-CUS., (N.T.), Dated: November 12, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>More Commissioners notified to adjudicate DRI cases</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Central Board of Excise and Customs has notified a few more Commissioners to adjudicate DRI cases. In this regard, CBEC issued eight notifications for eight different show cause notices. Ideally, Board could have issued a single notification listing out all the show cause notices and the Commissioners who would be adjudicating them instead of issuing eight different notifications in eight different files. A single Notification could have been issued from one file and photocopies posted in the other files. Hey wait! Bureaucracy has to show that it is working and therefore, we have eight files moving up and down the ladder with eight different notifications.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_119.htm" target="_blank">Customs Notification NO. 119/2008 – Cus (N.T.)</a>,<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_120.htm" target="_blank">220</a>,<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_121.htm" target="_blank">221</a>,<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_122.htm" target="_blank">222</a>,<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_123.htm" target="_blank">223</a>,<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_124.htm" target="_blank">224</a>,<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_125.htm" target="_blank">225</a> and <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2008/cnt08_126.htm" target="_blank">126/2008 – Cus (N.T.)</a> All Dated: November 12, 2008</strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DGEP's clarification and directive on setting up of duty free shops</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">FIPB considers the proposals of foreign direct investment for setting up of duty free shops at airport/ports by evaluating the technicalities involved therein (i.e. if it includes technical collaboration/industrial license apart from foreign investment) and also keeping in view sectoral policies and requirements vis-a-vis the proposal(s).</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It is clarified that the recommendation of FIPB with regard to these proposals is only for foreign financial and technical collaboration and it does not automatically confer any right on the applicants to set up shops at any port. The foreign investors will have to obtain other prescribed clearances separately in accordance with the guidelines issued by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Secretariat of Industrial Assistance (FC Division) under the Press Note No. 3 (1997 series) dated 07.01.1997.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">In this backdrop, the jurisdictional Commissioners of Customs/Central Excise are directed to adhere and scrupulously follow the conditions, restrictions and the statutory requirements under the Customs Act, 1962 before granting licenses for setting up of duty free shops even in cases where FIPB has approved the proposal. The directive highlights CBEC's instructions, conditions and guidelines for setting up of private bonded warehouse from time-to-time, notably Circulars Nos. 68/95 dated 15.6.95, 99/95 dated 20.9.95, 28/96-Cus dated 14.5.96 and 18/2007-Cus dated 24.04.2007.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2008/cuscir08_19.htm" target="_blank">DGEP CIRCULAR NO. 19/2008-Cus., Dated: November 14, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Amendment to ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import items</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT has amended the ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import items to ease the restriction on import of marble tiles and freely permit such imports provided CIF value is US$ 50 & above per square metre except, in case of imports from Nepal. However, this exemption shall be applicable only to such imports, which have been processed/manufactured out of marble mined in Nepal. This facility will not be available for products which have been manufactured/ processed in Nepal using imported marble.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2008/dgft08not057.htm" target="_blank">NOTIFICATION NO. 57/(RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: November 12, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Export of cement and steel products facilitated</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">With signals that the inflation is heading southward, the DGFT has decided to withdraw restrictions on export of cement and steel products. They will be eligible for benefits under Focus Market Scheme as well. Wonder who will come to the aid of construction sector which is terribly hit with people refusing to buy new flats due to credit crunch and thousands of vacant flats gathering dust.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=45&filename=notification/dgft/2008/dgft08not058.htm" target="_blank">NOTIFICATION NO. 58/(RE-2008)/2004-2009, Dated: November 14, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Amendment to schedule of DEPB rates</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DGFT has amended the schedule of DEPB rates to restore DEPB benefits to export of cement and steel items. Incidentally these benefits were suspended vide PN 130 (RE-2007)/2004-2009 dated March 27, 2008 to reign in cement and steel manufacturers.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=47&filename=notification/dgft/2008/dgft08pn108.htm" target="_blank">PUBLIC NOTICE NO 108 (RE-2008) /2004-2009, Dated : November 14, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>EXIM Bank extends LOC to Government of Syria</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Exim Bank entered into an agreement (dated June 5, 2008) with the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic to provide for a Line of Credit (LOC) of USD 25 million (USD twenty five million ) for financing export of goods from India with effect from October 27, 2008. This would be extended to those goods which are eligible for export under the Foreign Trade Policy and whose purchase may be agreed to be financed by the Exim Bank. Out of the total Credit an amount up to 90% of the FOB /CFR/CIF contract price of the Eligible Contract may be made available to the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic . The last date for opening of Letters of Credit and Disbursement will be 48 months from the scheduled completion date(s) of contract(s) in case of project exports and 72 months (June 4, 2014) from the execution date of the Credit Agreement in case of supply contracts. Shipments under the LOC will have to be declared on GR/SDF Forms as per instructions issued by Reserve Bank from time to time. Further, no agency commission is payable under this LOC. However, if required, the exporter may use his own resources or utilize balances of his Exchange Earners' Foreign Currency Account for payment of commission in free foreign exchange. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=280&filename=notification/rbi/2008/rbi08cir036.htm" target="_blank">A.P. (DIR Series) CIRCULAR NO. 36/RBI., Dated: November 14, 2008</a></strong></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>RBI reviews prudential norms for Exposures to Corporates, Commercial Real Estate and NBFC- ND-SI</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">RBI has reviewed the provisioning norms which were earlier prescribed in view of the continued high credit growth observed in specific sectors. As a countercyclical measure, the provisioning requirements for all types of standard assets stand are reduced to a uniform level of 0.40 per cent except in the case of direct advances to agricultural and SME sectors, which shall continue to attract a provisioning of 0.25 per cent, as hitherto.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The revised norms would be effective prospectively but the provisions held at present should not be reversed. However, in future, if by applying the revised provisioning norms, any provisions are required over and above the level of provisions currently held for the standard category assets these should be duly provided for.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Further, the risk weights for the banks claims on corporates, commercial real estate and NBFC-ND-SI (other than AFCs) stand revised to a uniform risk weight of 100%. As regards the claims on AFCs, there is no change in the risk weights, which would continue to be governed by the credit rating of the AFC, except the claims that attract a risk weight of 150 per cent under the New Capital adequacy Framework, which shall be reduced to a level of 100 per cent.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/rbi_notification.htm" target="_blank">RBI.No.2008-09/282 DBOD.BP.BC. 83/21.01.002/2008-09, Dated: November 15, 2008</a></strong></font></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>Income Tax</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>New unit set up by splitting up of the business of the old unit is not eligible for deduction under section 10A: it is a case of the same people doing the same business, the only difference being that the people have been shifted to the new office. The existing business of the assessee was development of software and in the new unit also, the assessee has done the same business of software development using the same employees and therefore it cannot be a case of different business requiring different specialization being taken up for which setting up of a new unit can be said to have become a business necessity - ITAT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>MERELY</strong> because the customers in the new unit were different, it cannot be a basis to hold that the new unit was separate and independent. In case, customer is the criterion to classify a new unit, one can easily set up a new office and start executing orders from new customers from the new place and get exemption by splitting up the business which is not permissible. Whether a new unit is different and a separate can be decided not by difference in customers but by the fact that the same is independent and is capable of functioning as such and is not an integral part of the old business. When a new unit is set up to produce a different product requiring different specialization and set up, it can be easily identified as a new and independent unit. The difficulty arises when new unit is doing the same business where the possibility of splitting up is very high.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Central Excise/Customs</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Countervailing duty paid under the provisions of the Customs Act, is payment of central excise duty – Not desirable for High Court to dismiss writ petition after 15 years just because alternate remedy at CESTAT is available, especially when issue is settled by Supreme Court – High Court</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>IN</strong> the above said background, we are of the view that the learned single Judge, after keeping the cases pending for more than seven years from the date of their filing, i.e. in 1992/1993, on the request of the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Central Government, awaiting the decisions of the Central Government and after the issuance of Central Government Notification No.104 of 1983, dated 28.12.1993, clarifying on the matter by making amendment to the relevant Notification, it was not desirable for the learned single Judge to ask the appellant-writ petitioner-assessee-Madura Coats Limited, to avail of the alternative remedy of appeal before the CEGAT/CESTAT</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>CENVAT Credit – Input credit legally availed when final products are dutiable not to be reversed when final products are exempted subsequently – CESTAT Five Member Larger Bench decision in <em>Ashok Iron & Steel Fabricators </em></strong>[<strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=52&filename=legal/cestat/2002/2002-TIOL-274-CESTAT-DEL-LB.htm" target="_blank"><font size="1">2002-TIOL-274-CESTAT-DEL-LB</font></a></strong>] <strong>and Supreme Court decision in <em>Dai Ichi Karkaria </em>[ <font size="1"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=50&filename=legal/sc/2002/2002-TIOL-79-SC-CX.htm" target="_blank">2002-TIOL-79-SC-CX</a></font>] followed – CESTAT Three Member Larger Bench</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>THE</strong> short point that came up for decision recently before this CESTAT Larger Bench (three member) was whether CENVAT credit availed by a manufacturer of dutiable final products has to be reversed when such final products become exempt subsequently.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#663399" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>See our columns tomorrow for the judgements</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until tomorrow with more <strong>DDT</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6633" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have a nice Day.</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>