TIOL-DDT 1683
01.09.2011
Thursday
DGFT has amended the entry in SION C-1579 of the Product Group “Engineering Products”.
The amended entry will read as:
| Export Item | Import Items |
| Description | Quantity | Description | Quantity |
| Iron-Nickel Alloy(s) Wire / Strip of different composition | 1 kg | 1.
| Nickel Pellets and / or cathodes | 1.03 kg/kg content in the export product |
| | | 2. | Billets of Iron/ Low Carbon Steel for Remelting | 1.03 kg/kg content in the export product |
Sl. No. 2 is the new entry. Earlier only one item - Nickel Pellets and / or cathodes were allowed for import. Now Billets of Iron/ Low Carbon Steel for Remelting has been added.
DGFT Public Notice No. 74/(RE-2010)2009-2014., Dated: August 30, 2011
Change in Addresses of EPCs - HOP Amended
THE DGFT has amended Appendix 2 and 5 of the Handbook of Procedure Vol.I.
Appendix 2 - List of Export Promotion Councils/ Commodity Boards/Export Development Authorities: Changes in Address, contact numbers and e-mail address of Export Promotion Council for EOUs & SEZ Units/its Regional Offices in serial number 11 are incorporated.
Appendix 5 - List of Inspection and Certification Agencies: Change in address of Best Mulyankan Consultants Ltd in serial number 23 has been incorporated.
DGFT Public Notice No. 75/(RE-2010)2009-2014., Dated: August 30, 2011
Penalty for Failure to Export Cotton Yarn
POLICY Circular No. 27 dated 01.04.2011 in para 4 deals with the consequences of failure to export the allowed quantity within stipulated time. Subsequently, Policy Circular No. 38 issued on 10.08.2011 provided tolerance for variation of (–) 5% (negative five percent) in weight. Thus, exporters with a shortfall of (and up to) 5% in weight will not face any penal action.
Now DGFT has decided that shortfall beyond 5% can be regularised by the respective RAs if the defaulters pay a penalty of Rs. 10,000/ + 1% of value of shortfall in excess of the allowance of 5%. Such exporters will not be treated as defaulters for the purpose of future registrations.
DGFT Trade Notice No. 19., Dated: August 30, 2011
Duty Drawback Scheme - CAG finds Procedural Deficiencies and Absence of Clear Provisions
CAG Observed:
++ No supplementary rules have been framed under Section 74(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 laying down the parameters for identification of goods in case of re-exports.
++ The Board has not issued instructions specifying how to determine whether goods were ¶used¶ or not.
++ Delays in claim processing and absence of floor value in the Customs Valuation rules for freight charges on exported goods.
++ Market verification of the declared price had not been initiated in cases where there was material difference between the declared price and declared market value.
++ Fixation of All Industries Rate of drawback had not been fully documented.
++ Instances of non compliance to rules and provisions on processing of time barred claims, delay in fixation of brand rates, sanction of drawback on products not specified in brand rate letters and excess payment of drawback due to mis-classification.
From CAG's Audit Report No. 15/2011-12
'Marketable to Consumer' Supreme Court Elucidates
THE word ¶consumer¶ refers to the person who purchases the product for his consumption, as distinct from a purchaser who trades in it. The marketability of the product to ¶the purchaser trading in it¶ is distinguishable from the marketability of the product to ¶the purchaser purchasing the same for final consumption¶ as in the latter case, the person purchases the product for his own consumption and in that case, he expects the product to be suitable for his own purpose and the consumer might purchase a product having marketability, which it did not possess earlier. Therefore, the phrase ¶marketable to the consumer¶ would naturally mean the marketability of the product to ¶the person who purchases the product for his own consumption¶.
We bring you this judgement dated 30th August today. Please see Breaking News.
Is Arvind Kejriwal still an IRS officer?
IS Arvind Kejriwal, one of the most visible faces of Team Anna, still an IRS officer?
He is, as per the latest Civil List issued by the Income Tax Department. If this is true, Arvind is still a Government servant and all the consequences follow.
DDT verified the Draft Civil List issued by the CBDT in F.No.HRD/CM/137/1/2010-11 on 17.01.2011 and found Arvind Kejriwal at Sl. No. 426 of the list of Additional Commissioners and the list states that he is posted at Delhi. Of course the communication has a disclaimer – “In case there are cases of VRS, Resignation, any other discrepancies/inaccuracies/deficiencies/omissions noticed in the Draft, these may kindly be brought to the notice of the Database Cell.
Extract from the List:
| S. No. | Name Code No. Date of Appt to Group-A | Qualification
(Subject) | Date of Birth/Domicile | Date of appointment as Jt/Addl CIT | Present Post |
| 426 | Arvind Kumar Kejriwal 92069 5/9/93 | Not Available | 16/07/68 | 26/03/2003 | Delhi |
There are some more interesting Data available as per CBDT records published in their web site.
Current Posting Details
| Rank.: | Addl/JCIT | Grade.: | JCIT |
| Phone No. : | | Fax No.: | |
| Place of Posting: | Delhi | | |
| Region: | Delhi CCA | | |
| Joining Date: | 01 Jan 2009 | Post Description.: | VRS Applied |
| Officer Status: | Serving | Address: | |
So as per the CBDT records, Arvind Kejriwal is still working under the charge of CCA, Delhi and he has applied for VRS. If that is so, will they ask him to report to duty?
Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases
Central Excise
Intermediate products actually marketed - passes test of marketability: SC
THE consistent view of this Court is that the marketability is an essential criteria for charging duty and that the test of marketability is that the product which is made liable to duty must be marketable in the condition in which it emerges; the word 'Marketable' means saleable or suitable for sale and that it need not in fact be marketed but then the article should be capable of being sold to consumers, as it is without anything more; the essence of marketability of goods is neither in the form nor in the shape or condition in which the manufactured article is found but it is the commercial identity of the article known to the market for being bought and sold; the product in question is generally not being bought or sold or has no demand in the market, would be irrelevant.
Income Tax
Whether when there is no material to conclude that sum deposited in bank account is either wholly or partly undisclosed, prohibitory order issued u/s 132(3) is unsustainable in law: Orissa HC
THE questions before the HC are - Whether when the bank account, from which the sum was withdrawn by the Department during search under prohibitory order u/s 132(3), is already disclosed in the books of account and the Revenue could not prove that the particular amount was undisclosed, the action taken by the department is illegal and not in conformity with section 132 and whether the prohibitory order issued u/s 132(3) without forming any belief and without any material to conclude that the amount deposited in the bank account is either wholly or partly undisclosed, is unsustainable in law. And the assessee's writ is allowed.
Service Tax
No Service Tax on laying of Pipeline before 16.5.2005 and before 1.6.2007: HC
THE plumbing, drain laying or other installations for transport of fluids etc., was included in the definition of 'erection commissioning or installation', for the first time, on 16 th June 2005. The reading of the additional counter shows, that the respondent has demanded the service tax from the petitioner, by treating it to be carrying on business for execution of work Contract. This plea of the respondent deserves to be rejected, as the work contract was, first time, Included under 65(105) (zzzza) with effect from 1 st June 2007.
See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements
Until Tomorrow with more DDT
Have a Nice Day.
Download PDF
