2019-TIOL-887-ITAT-BANG

Manoj Kumar Jaiswal Vs ACIT

Whether the TDS return filed u/s 200(3) of the Act can be declared as non-est by the CIT(A) by moving beyond the subject matter of the appeal - NO : ITAT

- Assessee's appeal allowed: BANGALORE ITAT

RH International Ltd Vs ITO

Whether assessee can be allowed benefit of deduction of the TDS amount paid subsequently in computation of income of the previous year, in which, such tax has been paid - YES : ITAT

- Assessee's appeal partly allowed: DELHI ITAT

Shri Vivek Jhunjhunwala Vs ITO

Whether if trading in shares is supported by bills, contract notes, demat statements and bank statements and such transactions are accepted by the AO in earlier years, the same can be treated as bogus on the basis of reports of the Investigation Wing or the statements of third parties - NO : ITAT

- Assessee's appeal partly allowed: KOLKATA ITAT

Vijay Kumar Aggarwal Vs ITO

Whether in absence of evidence to show that as per agreement with the bank, interest in question has accrued during relevant year, the same can be allowed as deduction - NO : ITAT

- Assessee's appeal dismissed: AMRITSAR ITAT

2019-TIOL-883-ITAT-PUNE

DCIT Vs Kumar Builder Construction

Whether in absence of contrary proved by Revenue, following the order of Tribunal in assessee's own case, can claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) should be allowed - YES : ITAT

- Revenue's appeal dismissed: PUNE ITAT

2019-TIOL-41-AAAR-GST

Super Wealth Financial Enterprises Pvt Ltd

GST - AAR had held that s ervices provided by applicant by way of providing energy efficient street lighting services including OM of the street lighting infrastructure during the contracted period to Bhubaneshwar Municipal Corporation (BMC) does not constitute supply of "pure services" as it involves significant use of goods/materials with stipulation to transfer the total business assets to BMC at the end of the contract period - appeal to AAAR.

Held: In the contract, it is clearly specified that all installed equipments constructed or system installed are transferred to BMC in good condition, therefore, activities carried out by the appellant is to be considered as supply of goods in terms of provisions of Schedule II, Para 4(a) of CGST Act - appeal is rejected by upholding the ruling of AAR: AAAR

SERVICE TAX

CENTRAL EXCISE

2019-TIOL-981-HC-MAD-CX

CST Vs Ennore Port Ltd

CX - Whether the Tribunal's Final Order is correct in law, when there is no provision under Section 35 C of CEA, 1944 to close the appeal for statistical purposes without going into merits - The court also had an occasion to deal with an identical substantial question of law in case of M/s.Indusind Bank Ltd. - In the light of said decision, the order passed by Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal with a direction to await the decision, which is now pending before the High Court at Ahmedabad in case of Housing and Urban Development Corporation Ltd. and the substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the Revenue: HC

- Appeal allowed: MADRAS HIGH COURT

CCT & CE Vs Laila Sugars Pvt Ltd

CX - The assessee is engaged in manufacture of sugar and molasses for which the main raw material is sugarcane - They extracts the sugarcane juice by crushing the said sugarcane, which is further processed and used for manufacture of sugar and molasses - During this process, impurities which are extracted in form of bagasse which is nothing but the remnants of sugarcane, after extraction of juice are referred to as bagasse, which is either used as fuel within the factory or sold to customers outside - Assessee is availing CENVAT credit on common input such as chemicals, grease and oils and common input services like GTA, telephone service, main power service which were common to the manufacture of dutiable goods as well as exempted goods, they had neither maintained separate records of inputs/input service as provided in Rule 6(2) nor paid an amount equal to 6% of the value of such exempted goods - A SCN was issued to them for demanding 6% of amount of bagasse and press mud sold by them during March 2015 to December 2015 along with interest and penalty - The issue involved is whether bagasse which is a remnant emerging from crushing of sugarcane for extraction of sugarcane juice for the manufacture of final product i.e., sugar and the by-product molasses is a final product/exempted goods attracting the provisions of Rule 6(2) and Rule 6(3) of CCR, 2004 - Further, where the assessee is liable to pay the amount equivalent to 6% of value of bagasse and pressed mud cleared as per provisions of Rule 6(3) of CCR, 2004 since bagasse is "NIL" rated product and they failed to maintain separate accounts as prescribed in Rule 6(2) of CCR, 2004 - Further, this issue is no more res integra and has been settled by various decisions relied upon by the appellate authority - Therefore, no infirmity found in the impugned order which is upheld: CESTAT

- Appeals dismissed: BANGALORE CESTAT

CUSTOMS

NOTIFICATION

ctariffadd19_020

Anti-dumping duty imposed on Saccharin imported from Indonesia

CASE LAWS

2019-TIOL-1270-CESTAT-MAD

Liyakath Shipping And Logistics Vs CC

Cus - Assessee submits that they are customs broker whose licence has been revoked without just reason; that due to this survival of the customs broker as well as livelihood of their employees are badly affected, hence early hearing may be granted - Early hearing is granted: CESTAT

- Application allowed: CHENNAI CESTAT

Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Ltd Vs CCE, C & ST

Cus - There are various items imported by assessee - Anhydrous ammonia is of Indonesian origin and imported, which is fully exempted from BCD, under Notfn 46/2011 Cus for want of original documents regarding country of origin, the item was cleared on payment of BCD, at full rate, under self-assessment, in terms of Section 17 (1) of Customs Act, 1962 - Subsequently, upon receipt of country of Original documents, the assessee claimed the benefit of aforesaid notification by filling necessary refund application in terms of Section 27 (1) of the Act, within the prescribed time period - Muriate of Potash was imported under two bills of entry, the item MOP is fully exempted from CVD in terms of SI No. 127 of Notfn 12/2012-CE - Due to the system inability under EDI/RMS the benefit of exemption Notfn was not extended, while filling the bill of entry, therefore, assessee cleared the imported MOP on self assessment under Section 17 (I) of Customs Act 1962, upon payment of CVD at usual rate - Subsequently, the Customs duty paid, was claimed as refund in terms of Section 27 (I) of Customs Act, within the prescribed time - The raw material i.e. rock phosphate was imported from Jordan, with whom the assessee has long term contract - The said contract contains price variation clause, according to which depending upon the quantum of off take, the overseas supplier offers quantity rebate and price discount, which can only be ascertained at the end of the contract period - The assessee at the time of importation, paid duty on the value shown in the bill of lading, which was higher than the transaction value, determined subsequently, after receipt of discount/rebate amount from the foreign suppliers - Transaction value, in terms of Section 14 of the Act, means the price actually paid payable for the imported goods - Duty, in terms of Section 14 of the Act, is leviable/payable on the transaction value - Duty payable in this case became lesser than the duty already paid by assessee - The refund claim was rejected mainly on the ground that the assessment made by assessee in the Bill of Entry reached its finality, which they have not challenged - The lower authorities followed the decision of Supreme Court in case of Priya Blue Industries Limited 2004-TIOL-78-SC-CUS - The Tribunal in the case of Lalit Kumar after considering the decision of Priya Blue Industries Limited 2004-TIOL-78-SC-CUS, dismissed the appeal filed by Revenue - The impugned order cannot be sustained and accordingly, it is set aside: CESTAT

- Appeals allowed: KOLKATA CESTAT