 |
|
2018-TIOL-NEWS-068 Part 2 | Friday March 23, 2018
|
|
|
Dear Member,
Sending following links. Warm Regards,
TIOL Content Team
TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.
For assistance please call us at +91-78385-94748 or email us at helpdesk@tiol.in. |
|
|
|
|
|
TIOL TUBE VIDEO |
 |
|
|
DIRECT TAX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-TIOL-506-HC-MUM-IT + Story Tata Teleservices Maharashtra Ltd Vs DCIT
Whether a certificate granting lower TDS rate can abruptly be cancelled merely on the basis that the assessee is likely to suffer huge losses in future, and without providing other valid or cogent reasons for the same - NO: HC
Whether AO is obliged to follow a precedent order of the Tribunal on the same issue and involving the same assessee - YES: HC
Whether in such circumstances, if the AO opines that the assessee is not covered by such precedent, the AO is obliged to record reasons behind such finding - YES: HC - Assessee's Writ Petition Allowed: BOMBAY HIGH COURT
2018-TIOL-430-ITAT-AHM + Story
Paramount Charity Trust Vs CCE
Whether inclusion of any new objects by an amendment to trust-deed, can be construed as an illegal exercise, warranting disentitlement of trust from registration u/s 12AA - NO: ITAT
Whether non-communication of amended trust-deed to the Department, being a mere irregularity, should not form basis for cancellation of registration u/s 12A - YES: ITAT
Whether establishment of a diagnostic centre by a charitable trust, would render the trust as a commercial venture - NO: ITAT
2018-TIOL-429-ITAT-JAIPUR
Rajasthan Land Developers Pvt Ltd Vs ITO
Whether intentional omission to record cash payments in books of account, will not absolve him of his tax liabilities - YES: ITAT
Whether technical failure to record the specific provision of Statute while making additions to assesse's income, will render the assessment invalid - NO: ITAT - Assessee's appeal dismissed: JAIPUR ITAT
2018-TIOL-428-ITAT-MUM
ACIT Vs Michelle N Sanghvi
Whether date of physical possession has any relevance in deciding the period of holding, for purpose of computing capital gain - YES: ITAT
Whether interest in the property gets created in favour of purchaser, the moment the agreement to purchase is entered into along with part payment for the same - YES: ITAT - Revenue's appeal dismissed: MUMBAI ITAT
2018-TIOL-427-ITAT-HYD
Visaka Industries Ltd Vs Addl.CIT
Whether advance paid for purpose of expansion of business, by way of purchase of new machine and lease advances, will fall within the ambit of section 37 - YES: ITAT
Whether fly ash procured by assessee on concession, deserves to be allowed as business expenses u/s 37 - YES: ITAT - Case Remanded: HYDERABAD ITAT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
INDIRECT TAX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SERVICE TAX SECTION
2018-TIOL-931-CESTAT-MAD
Gateway for Entrepreneurship and Management Studies Trust Vs CCE
ST - Assessee is providing coaching and training services to the students of Alagappa University and collected fees from the students for such coaching - Department views that said services would fall under "Commercial Training Coaching Services" under Section 65 (26) and 65 (27) of FA, 1994 - Fees is paid directly to the university by students in form of demand drafts - Identical issue has been agitated before Tribunal in case of JMC Educational Trust 2011-TIOL-410-CESTAT-MAD, wherein Tribunal, following its earlier decision in case of JMC Educational Trust 2010-TIOL-1753-CESTAT-MAD and also of High Court of Kerala in case of Malappuram Distt. Parallel College Association 2006-TIOL-35-HC-KERALA-ST had set aside the demand of service tax holding that training and coaching provided by assessee is an essential part of a course or curriculum of a university - The facts of this appeal are very pari materia with those in said decisions - From the documents available in file, assessee has been authorized as a Study Centre under a Memorandum of Understanding entered into with Alagappa University on the basis of Distance Education Council (DEC) guidelines issued under the IGNOU Act, 1985 - This being so, assessee would be exempted from service tax levy under Section 65 (27) of the Act even without benefit of Notfn 10/2003-ST: CESTAT - Appeal allowed: CHENNAI CESTAT
CENTRAL EXCISE SECTION
2018-TIOL-929-CESTAT-MUM Paper Products Ltd Vs CCE
CX - Appellant is engaged in the manufacture and printing of packaging material for various food items - The department found that the assessee has shown miscellaneous income under the various components like scrap sale, drum sale to the employees and also it was found that the appellant has received compensation for supplying the inferior ink of a sum of Rs.6,32,397/- - SCN issued for adding such values to the AV of the goods manufactured - adjudicating authority dropped the demand except to the extent of the compensation received by the appellant for supplying inferior quality of ink – both, appellant and Revenue before CESTAT.
Held: Miscellaneous income was adhoc income which was generated by selling the scrap like sale of old drums and furniture, etc., hence, the said income cannot be added to the value of final products - However, compensation received for supplying the inferior ink is a regular activity and this was an income of the appellant which was to be added to the value of the goods – impugned order appears reasonable and the same is sustained – Both appeals are dismissed: CESTAT [para 4, 5] - Appeals dismissed: MUMBAI CESTAT
2018-TIOL-928-CESTAT-MUM
CCE Vs Trimurtiplast Containers Pvt Ltd
CX - Period involved is April, 2015 to June, 2015 - Issue involved is whether the supply made to 100% EOU is entitled for refund of accumulated Cenvat Credit under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004– Revenue in appeal before CESTAT contending that vide Notification No. 8/2015-C.E. (N.T.) dated 1 st March, 2015, Rule 5 was amended and in terms of para (1A) "export of goods" means any goods which are to be taken out of India to a place outside India"; therefore, respondent assessee is not entitled for refund in terms of rule 5 of CCR, 2004 in respect of the impugned clearances.
Held: As per the amended definition of "export of goods", refund is only allowed in respect of export goods which are taken outside India, therefore, impugned order is not sustainable and hence set aside – Revenue appeal allowed: CESTAT [para 5] - Appeal allowed: MUMBAI CESTAT
2018-TIOL-927-CESTAT-MUM
Zenith Birla India Ltd Vs CCE
CX - Issue is whether the emergence of zinc dross and ash in the process of galvanization carried out by the appellant of MS steel pipes and tubes, whether the same is a manufactured product or not and/or liable to charge of central excise duty. Held: All these issues have been decided in favour of the manufacturer-assessee by the Bombay High Court in the case of Hindalco Industries Ltd. - 2014-TIOL-22662-HC-MUM-CX and CBEC Circular 1027/15/2016-CX dated 25.04.2016 – appeal is allowed by setting aside the impugned order – appellant entitled to consequential benefit: CESTAT [para 4] - Appeal allowed: MUMBAI CESTAT
CUSTOMS SECTION
NOTIFICATION
dgft17not055
Amendments to FTP 2015-20 - Extension to IGST and compensation Cess exemption under EOU scheme till 01.10.2018
CASE LAW
2018-TIOL-930-CESTAT-MAD
CC Vs Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd
Cus - Assessee filed Bill of Entry for clearance of one new Swift Kon - Tiki 669 TAG Motor Home (caravan) - On examination, it was found that imported vehicle did not comply with all conditions as per the Import Policy Notes to ITC (HS) Classification of Chapter 87 - Department views that necessary Type Approval Certificate have not been produced and conditions have not been complied with - Commissioner has observed that substantial part of conditions in Sl. No. 2 of ITC (HS) Policy to Chapter 87 has been complied and only the conditions (b) and (c) of said policy have not been complied - There is no dispute that vehicle was imported for personal use of company Chairman - Further, the said person is a physically challenged person and the vehicle is custom made / specifically designed for the use of such person - In case of such goods, it is not possible to arrive at the correct market value - Taking into consideration all these facts along with the fact that the vehicle has been imported for use of special need person, the Commissioner has imposed redemption fine of Rs.5,10,000/- and penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- - No grounds found to interfere with order passed by Commissioner: CESTAT - Appeal dismissed: CHENNAI CESTAT
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MISC CASES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED.
TIOL HOUSE, 490, Udyog Vihar, Phase - V,
Gurgaon, Haryana - 122001, INDIA
Board : +91 124-2879600
Fax: +91 124-2879610
Web: http: //www.taxindiaonline.com
Email: updates@tiol.in
__________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY/PROPRIETARY NOTE.
The Document accompanying this electronic transmission contains information from TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED., which is confidential, proprietary or copyrighted and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this transmission. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This prohibition includes, without limitation, displaying this transmission or any portion thereof, on any public bulletin board. If you are not the intended recipient of this document, please return this document to TIOL PRIVATE LIMITED. immediately |
|
|
|
