TIOL-DDT 1588
13.04.2011
Wednesday

THE Government has amended Notification No. 61/94-Cus NT dated 21.11.1994 to notify Jamnagar in Gujarat and Chandigarh in Punjab to be Customs Airports for

(a) Unloading of:

(b) loading of:

But how can they load exported goods that is goods that are already exported? What they mean is 'export goods' and not 'exported goods'!

As per the 'NOTE' to this amending notification, Notification 61/94-Cus(NT) dated 21.11.1994 was last amended in the year 2002 by Notification No. 59/2002-Cus(NT) dated 28.08.2002 whereas it was last amended by Notification No. 67/2009-Cus (NT) dated 15.06.2009 and in the intervening period it was amended by several notifications making changes to the list of Customs Airports.

Why is it that the Board cannot track its own notifications before making amendments? Notifications issued by Board are subordinate legislation and they cannot be manufactured in a casual and routine manner. Fortunately, Notifications issued under section 7 of Customs Act, 1962 are not required to be placed before Parliament in terms of section 159 of Customs Act, 1962, but that does not provide any saving grace if notifications are issued in a very casual manner.

Notification No. 29/2011 - Cus., (NT), Dated: April 11, 2011

Exemption Notification - Substantial Compliance may not be enough – Board Circulates Supreme Court Judgement

CBEC refers to the landmark judgement of the Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Hari Chand Shri Gopal & Others - 2010-TIOL-95-SC-CX-CB. The issue involved was whether a manufacturer of a specified final product is eligible to get the benefit of exemption from remission of excise duty under chapter X of Central Excise Rules on specified intermediate goods as per notification No.121/94-CE dated 11-8-94, if captively consumed for manufacture of final products on the ground that the records kept by it at the recipient end would indicate its ¶intended use¶ and ¶substantial compliance¶ of the procedure set out in chapter X of Central Excise Rules.

The Court has held that the observation of the Tribunal that the procedure laid down under Chapter X is meant only for establishing the receipt of goods and utilization thereof by the recipient is not correct. The Judgement further held that the Tribunal completely overlooked the object and purpose of the procedure laid down under Chapter X.

Board wants the Chief Commissioners to bring this to the notice of all concerned for necessary action.

CBEC Letter F.No.384/58/2003-JC, Dated: 28th January, 2011

Respect Taxpayers as you would your parents – CBDT Chairman tells newly inducted IRS Officers

CBDT Chairman Sudhir Chandra while delivering the valedictory address at the passing out ceremony of the 63rd batch of Indian Revenue Service, on Monday at NADT, Nagpur, urged the new Income Tax Assistant Commissioners to treat the taxpayer with the same concern and respect with which he or she would wish their parents to be treated. He emphasized the need for fairness and transparency in public administration.

The 63rd batch of IRS consisted of 120 officers from 23 States with 2 PhDs and a medical doctor. During the training, the probationers had foreign excursions to countries like Australia, Malaysia, Netherlands and South Africa.

The function had a distinguished guest – Union Minister of State for Railways, KH Muniappa, not in his official capacity, but as a parent of an outgoing officer.

Missing IRS(C&CE) Officers

THE CBEC has circulated a list of 27 IRS(C&CE) officers who have been unauthorisedly absent from duty for a long time. It has not been possible to take necessary action against these officers for want of their present address(es). The list contains, inter-alia, the last known posting of these officers.

Board has requested the Chief Commissioners and DGs to provide information which may help locating the whereabouts of these officers. It seems some of these officers are outside the country (illegally of course); even the Board letter says that some of them are reportedly abroad. It is strange that these officers have left the country or not returned from abroad, against all rules and norms and these are senior revenue officers of the government of India! Apparently the department is very accommodative and there is no punishment for absconding officers – they can come back and happily continue in the department!

But the Board's list is also not that all correct. It is not as if all the officers in the list are unauthorisedly absent as the Board letter says – the fact seems to be that Board doesn't have information about them and that is because the Board records are not updated. Recently I met at least one of these missing officers working in the office!

Personal Hearing at 12.53 hrs – Shubh Muhurt?

HERE is a Commissioner who knows the value of time – every minute is precious. He has fixed a personal hearing at 12.53 hrs! And his Superintendent who sent the PH Intimation states that no adjournment will be granted and if the assessee fails to appear at the time fixed (mind you 12.53 by the minute – not a second before not a second later), the matter will be decided ex parte .

Normally we find such precise time being fixed for occasions like wedding, but it is perhaps a good omen that the Revenue officers also follow these auspicious timings. Maybe the assessee should be given an option to choose the time so as to exclude durmuhurat and rahu kalam!

Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

Income Tax

Income tax - Whether, if assessee is paid non-compete fee for manufacturing and trading activities, and experts allocate sum between both activities in certain ratio, can AO substitute views of experts without taking views of other experts? - NO, says HC

THE issue before the HC is - Whether, if the assessee is paid non-compete fee for its manufacturing and trading activities, and a professional firm makes allocation of the sum towards both the activities based on a detailed study before the sum is returned to tax, AO is entitled to substitute the studied view of the experts and make additions. Is it necessary for the AO to seek the views of other experts before it rejects the study furnished with the return. And the HC's answer goes in favour of the assessee.

Central Excise

Central Excise - Demand - Stay and waiver of predeposit - Appeal and stay application filed before Tribunal - High Court cannot be used as stopgap arrangement for securing an illegal order to postpone payment: HC

THE short question is whether the petitioner is entitled to have the benefit of an interim order from the High Court pending hearing of his stay application as well as an application to waive pre-deposit pending before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT )?

Customs

Customs - Oil cleared from SEZ Unit - Duty demanded from recipient - No Jurisdiction - Full waiver of duty of over Rs 66 lakh and equal penalty - CESTAT

CUSTOMS duty of Rs.66,62,662 /- and interest and penalty of identical amount was confirmed against M/s. Reliance Industries Limited in respect of the duty free procured furnace oil from a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) unit M/s. Adani Enterprises Limited by misrepresenting the fact that the vessel was on foreign run, whereas the same was found to be on coastal run.

Tomorrow is a holiday – Dr. Ambedkar's Birthday.

See our columns Friday for the judgements

Until Friday with more DDT

Have a Nice Time.