TIOL-DDT 2242
02.12.2013
Monday

FORM VCES 1 has the following footnote relating to Details of Tax dues (Sl No 6 of the Declaration Form)

Furnish a calculation sheet separately (for the purpose of calculation of tax dues, the manner of calculation as prescribed in Sl No 3F(I) or as the case may be, the Part B of Form ST-3, as existed during relevant period may be used and calculation of tax dues may be furnished tax return period wise, and service wise, if tax dues relates to more than one service)

It seems the above footnote is turning to be a big hurdle for many VCES aspirants. It is learnt that at some places, the declarations are not accepted and the officers are insisting that the calculation sheet should be exactly in the same proforma as 3(F)(I) of the ST 3 return with month-wise details filled up for the return period. Many assessees feel that it is as good as filing ST 3 for the last five years. Can't the assessee submit the calculation sheet as per his own assessment for the return period? Should he declare the details month-wise, return period-wise, filling all the rows from (a) to (i) of Table in Sl No 3F(I) of the ST 3 return? Can the declaration be rejected if the information is not provided exactly in the same proforma?

It seems there is some misunderstanding on this issue and the purpose of footnote is only for providing manner of computation of tax liability and the calculation sheets need not be insisted in the same proforma of ST 3 return. A quick re-look on this issue is urgently needed to clear the confusion prevailing. Will the Board/FM clarify?

The Finance Minister is going around promoting VCES, but it looks like too many people are out to thwart his scheme. The Department should realise that every objection to a declaration will put off ten prospective declarants.

Please click on the following link to see what is 3(F)(I) of ST 3 return:

No Government has the right to cause misery and harassment to the taxpayer

"EVERY Government has a right to levy taxes. But no Government has the right, in the process of extracting tax, to cause misery and harassment to the taxpayer and the gnawing feeling that he is made the victim of palpable injustice"

IN a judgement in yet another Vodafone case delivered on Friday (29th November 2013), the Bombay High Court extracted the above quote from NaniPalkhiwala's monumental work “The Law and Practice of Income Tax” and observed,

The revenue would do well to keep the above sage advice in mind while dealing with the assessee. We are constrained to observe that in this case it would be natural for the petitioner to feel harassed as the Assessing Officer did not give any opportunity of hearing before making a reference to the TPO and none of the two authorities viz. the TPO and the Assessing Officer dealt with its preliminary objection. The TPO does not deal with the petitioner's objection about applicability of Chapter X, on the ground that it would be dealt with by the Assessing officer. Thereafter when the petitioner raises the same issue before the Assessing Officer he does not deal with the same on the ground that he is bound to complete the assessment in terms of the ALP determined by the TPO. We hope the revenue will be more sensitive to the just demands of the assessee and not treat the assessee as an adversary who has to be taxed, no matter what .

This case was reported in 2013-TII-17-HC-MUM-TP

Coercive Recovery - A.O has misused his powers - ITAT

IN a remarkable order last week, the ITAT came down heavily on the AO for attachment of bank account of an assesse and ordered refund of the entire amount.

The assessee, Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority, is an authority setup under Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act with a view to solve the acute shortage of housing problem in the State. The Income Tax demand is about Rs. 160 Crores.

The assessee received the order of the CIT(A) on 16.11.2013. The assessee has filed the appeal against the impugned order without any wastage of time on the very next working day but the A.O without waiting for the hearing and outcome of the Stay Application has taken the coercive action of recovery of the entire outstanding amount from the bank of the assessee as per Section 226(3) of the Income Tax Act.

The ITAT observed,

A.O has taken a coercive action by ignoring the basic rule of law and the directions and guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Jurisdiction High Court in case of UTI Mutual Fund Vs ITO.

We hold that the A.O has misused his powers and the action of recovery from the bank amount of the assessee is a gross violation of the directions as well as the basic rule of law and principle of natural justice. Accordingly, we direct the Revenue to refund the entire amount of Rs.159,84,03,720/- to the assessee within 10 days .

Tariff Values of Gold and silver reduced

THE  Government has decreased the Tariff values of Gold from 414 USD to 405 USD per 10 gms and Silver from 672 to 642 USD per kilogram with effect from 29.11.2013. Except the Tariff values of Crude Palm Oil and Areca Nuts which stay put, the tariff values of other items have been changed.

Incidentally, when the last time these values were changed by Notification 111/2013-Cus (NT) dated 14.11.2013, we had in DDT 2232 mentioned about the ‘cut & paste' monster playing havoc. Inasmuch as the notification said that the tariff value of silver will be  672 per kilogram ( i.e. no change ).  But actually, THERE WAS change. It was 738 earlier and by the amending notification it was changed to 672! And the comment "No Change" should have appeared against Sr. no.9, Table 2 'Poppy Seeds'.

Be that as it may, in the instant notification, although the Tariff Value of Crude Palm Oil remains unchanged at 914, there is no such comment against this item. The comment, however, correctly appears against Areca Nuts.

The last time around, when we pointed the error through this column, an officer called us up and asked us why we were so finicky about such “small” errors and asked us to stick to reporting and not commenting! Sir, it is these “small” errors which get bigger day by day if not taken seriously. And by the way, let us tell you that the error continues to be exhibited on the CBEC website.

But, is this addition of “comment” in the notification really required?

Tariff values as on  14.11.2013  and with effect from  29 .11.2013  are as under:

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Notification No. 116/2013-Cus (NT), Dated: November 29, 2013

VCES, 2013 enters the last lap

ONLY 30 days remain to file the VCES declaration and things have started getting hotter for those who till yesterday were sitting on the fence. The Anti-Evasion wings in all the Central Excise & Service Tax Commissionerates are working overtime and traipsing through the old records searching for the service tax assessees who went missing over the years.

The Finance Minister's threats are becoming real, after all. No kid glove treatment, mind it!

So, a reminder to those who do not want to miss the bus - catch the VCES laddoo as quickly as possible! Because, there is nothing on the horizon indicating that there is an extension in the pipeline.

Customs Deputy Commissioner Arrested by CBI

THE Central Bureau of Investigation arrested a Deputy Commissioner of Customs, ICD Dadri, GautamBudhaNagar(U.P) and two private persons in an alleged bribery case. It seems the Deputy Commissioner demanded a bribe of Rs. 5 Lakhs to release a seized consignment of tyres. Apart from this cash of 5 lakhs, CBI recovered around Rs. 14 lakhs, a 1 kg brick of gold and other ornaments.

Now, what will he do with all that money - in jail?

Tenth year of DDT

IT wasnine years ago, on a Wednesday morning that DDT was born. And these were the opening words with which I began the column - Welcome to DDT, yet another experiment in TIOL's incessant endeavour to provide you with the best.

The experiment continues unabated - come rain or shine. And I am thankful to the Government, which provides the fodder every day to keep DDT healthy, the netizens who begin their day with the click on the DDT image and keep writing to me, my Editorial team which keeps egging me day in and day out, my family who thinks I am doing some secretive pieces during the graveyard shift and those hundreds of calls that I have received all these years, some pleasant and some giving me a peace of their mind. And to my two colleagues whose job is to find fault with me and the draft DDT - what a sadistically pleasurable job they do - with perfection!

Thanks to all of you, I did not know how these nine years passed by without my keyboard giving away or my heart & mind telling me to STOP.

Over the years, DDT has achieved a few laurels - it made an entry in the Limca Book of Records, 2012 and also in the Limca Book of Records, 2013 as the longest running daily online column on tax matters.

As DDT enters the TENTH year, a big THANK YOU to all those for whom DDT is a daily habit.

Jurisprudentiol - Tuesday's cases

Customs

MCCBs imported by the Appellants are not commodities in packaged form and the packing is meant only for the purpose of ease of transportation - assessment u/s 4A for the purpose of CVD is not sustainable - in the absence of Rules, Act cannot be enforced -: CESTAT

THE appellants have imported certain consignments of Molded Case Circuit Breakers (MCCBs) and Plugs and Sockets. The imported plugs and sockets were not individually packed and are received in a carton consisting of 10, 50 or 100 bare plugs and sockets for the purpose of easy transportation. The imported Plugs and Sockets are specifically packed for exclusive use and are not intended for retail sale. The goods were assessed to CVD under Heading 85.36. The goods of heading 85.36 were notified under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1994 vide Notification 13/2002 dated 1 stMarch, 2002 as amended.

Investigation revealed that although the inner as well as outer carton was affixed with the label stating that the goods imported and specially packed are for the exclusive use in any industry as a raw material for the purpose of servicing any industry, mine or quarry and not intended for retail sale, the goods were allegedly sold to various non-industrial consumers at the MRP as per listed price list. The proceedings culminated in the confiscation of goods and confirmation of duty demand of Rs.50,26,981/- by adopting the MRP along with imposition of equivalent penalty u/s 114A and a penalty of Rs.2,00,000/- was imposed on the then G.M. of the appellant Company u/s 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Income Tax

Whether recovery proceedings can be initiated without passing an order under Sec 170(3) - NO: Delhi High Court

THE issues before the Bench are - Whether recovery proceedings can be initiated against an assessee, without passing an order u/s 170(3); Whether liability to penalty does not arise merely upon proof of default; Whether liability to pay penalty is a liability to pay tax and Whether penalty can be levied on the deceased persons payable on behalf of the assessee. And the writ is allowed partly.

Central Excise

Racks and Trolleys manufactured within the factory premises by employing fabricators - since appellant supplied raw materials/consumables, the fabricators are only hired labour and not independent manufacturers - CESTAT

THE appellants are manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapters 51, 55 and 58.On a visit to the appellant's factory, the CE officers discovered that the appellant had got racks and trolleys [SH 9403]fabricated within their own factory premises out of the raw materials supplied by the appellant and based on their own drawings and specifications. It was further found that the appellant had also supplied consumables such as welding rods, cutting gas etc., required for such fabrication work.

See our Columns tomorrow for the judgements

Until tomorrow with more DDT

Have a nice day.

Mail your comments to   vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com