BOARD has received several representations from Associations, Chambers of Commerce, Trade Bodies etc., about the divergent procedures followed by the field formations regarding examination and stuffing of export containers in the factory or warehouse under the supervision of Central Excise Officers.

Board clarifies,

++ It is reiterated that the facility/option of examination and sealing of export containers by the Central Excise Officers at the place of dispatch is available to both manufacturer-exporters (except when the export is on free Shipping Bill) and merchant-exporter in respect of the goods exported in terms of Rule 18 or 19 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Such examination, stuffing and sealing of export containers by the Central Excise Officers are permitted at the factory or warehouse or any other approved premises.

++ The examination, stuffing and sealing of export containers at the place of dispatch are required to be done by the jurisdictional Central Excise Superintendent/ Inspector.

++ The application for examination and stuffing of export containers at the place of dispatch has to be made to the jurisdictional Superintendent/ Inspector of Central Excise, 24 hours in advance or such shorter period as may be mutually agreed upon.

++ It is reiterated that exporter needs to correspond only with the range officer for such stuffing. Keeping in mind these requirements, the Chief Commissioner will ensure that the Commissioner should suitably augment staff strength available with range by making necessary administrative arrangements.

++ In respect of the services provided by the Central Excise Officers at any premises other than the premises which are not the normal work premises of that officer, i.e. for export from premises other than those registered with the Central Excise officer, MOT charges will be payable at the applicable rates even if the said services are being provided during the normal working hours. In case of the services provided beyond the normal working hours MOT charges as applicable will be payable for all the premises whether registered with the Central Excise or not.

CBEC Circular No. 952/13/2011-CX., Dated: September 08, 2011

FTP - Ban on Export of Rice lifted

GOVERNMENT has amended the entry at Sl. No.45 A of Chapter 10 of Schedule 2 in the ITC(HS) Classifications of Export and Import items, to make export of all varieties of non-Basmati rice free out of privately held stocks. Export will be allowed only through Custom EDI ports.

DGFT Notification No. 71(RE–2010)/2009-2014, Dated: September 09 2011

FTP - Ban on Export of Wheat lifted

GOVERNMENT has amended the entry at Sl. No.46 A of Chapter 10 of Schedule 2 in the ITC(HS) Classifications of Export and Import items, to make export of wheat free out of privately held stocks. Export will be allowed only through Custom EDI ports.

DGFT Notification No. 72(RE–2010)/2009-2014, Dated: September 09 2011

FTP - Export of Onions Banned

GOVERNMENT has prohibited export of all varieties of onions with effect from 9 th September 2011. Notification No. 24(RE-2010)/2009-14 dated 18.02.2011, is amended. It was only on 7 th September that Government had made a steep increase in the Minimum Export Price of onions and that had brought down the prices in the domestic market by 11 percent. Now with total ban on exports, prices should come down further.

But traders in Nashik mandi, the largest onion trading centre are very unhappy and have declared a boycott of auctions. Government apparently doesn't want to be stuck with an onion crisis in the coming festive season.

While traders in India are unhappy, the traders in Bangladesh are worried, as the prices have gone up there due to India's ban on exports. Bangladesh depends on Indian exports for most of its onion supplies.

DGFT Notification No. 73(RE–2010)/2009-2014, Dated: September 09 2011

FTP - ICD Karur to have online transmission of DES

AS and when Customs (CBEC) have conveyed their readiness to implement on-line message exchange between Customs and DGFT, Policy Circulars have been issued from time to time by DGFT indicating the names and Port Codes of such Customs Ports where EDI facility would be available.

With effect from today, ICD Karur is added to the existing 83 locations on-line transmission of DES (Advance Authorization), EPCG and DEPB Authorization:

DGFT Policy Circular No. 40 (RE–2010)/2009-2014, Dated: September 09 2011

Clearance to SEZ Developers – Amendment Retrospective

AS per Rule 6(6) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the provisions of sub-rule (1), (2), (3) and (4) were not applicable in case the excisable goods removed without payment of duty (1) cleared to a unit in SEZ. [Exempted and dutiable goods – obligations]

This was amended by Notification No. 50/2008 – CENT dated 31.12.2008 to stipulate that these provisions will not apply to goods cleared to a unit in SEZ or to a developer of SEZ for their authorized operations. [Developer was added]

So, the confusion about clearances to SEZ developers was sought to be put to an end. But things don't end like that in Revenue. Board by a private letter in F.No.267/52/2008-CX dated 7/1/2009, clarified that the amendment was prospective and would be applicable only from the date of the notification. So, the period prior to 31 st December 2008, was a happy issue for dispute.

In a stay application reported by us in 2009-TIOL-1096-CESTAT-BANG., the Bangalore CESTAT held that the amendment was retrospective. But the Delhi Bench headed by the President did not agree in 2009-TIOL-1567-CESTAT-DEL and referred the matter to a Larger Bench. The Larger Bench headed by the same President held that a reference cannot be made to the Larger Bench based on a stay order and so the Larger Bench returned the matter to the Division Bench. - 2010-TIOL-1841-CESTAT-DEL-LB.

The Division Bench is to hear the case tomorrow.

In the meantime, the Bangalore Bench of the CESTAT delivered its final order in the matter last Monday – 5 September 2011. This Bench confirmed that the amendment was retrospective.

We bring you this order today.

Please see Breaking News. Also see DDT 1066 and DDT 1024

DTA Clearances from EOUs - Matter goes to Larger Bench

DDT 1318 - 15.03.2010 observed, “FOR setting up an EOU in India, you need two things. One is LOP from the Development Commissioner and the other is a Master's in Mathematics from a reputed University. The former is required for carrying the operations as EOU and the latter for computing the duties payable on DTA clearances and the CENVAT Credit against such clearances”

The Legal Battle

In the Sarla Polyesters case 2008-TIOL-985-CESTAT-AHM, the CESTAT held that the third time cess is payable.

The High Court (2008-TIOL-516-HC-MUM-CX) set aside the CESTAT order and remanded the matter to the Tribunal.

On remand, as per the directions of the Bombay High Court, Tribunal served notice to the general public so that all the parties who are interested may also apply as interveners. After hearing the appellants, the interveners and the departmental representative, the CESTAT held, “What is required for the purpose of proviso to Section 3 of Central Excise Act, 1944 is to arrive at aggregate of customs duties and once we take a view that education cess is part of the customs duty and is an enhancement, the question of adding it again does not arise. (2010-TIOL-408-CESTAT-AHM)

The Delhi Bench of the Tribunal headed by the then President did not agree and referred the matter to a Larger Bench. Litigation continues!

We will bring you that case tomorrow.

Jurisprudentiol – Tuesday's cases

Service Tax

AS soon as registration certificate has been surrendered by appellant, duty is cast on department to verify whether appellant has rightly gone out of ambit of service tax or not: CESTAT

ONUS is on revenue to find out the cause of surrendering registration; if action is not taken at the same time, the same cannot be questioned subsequently. Therefore, extended period is not invocable.

Income Tax

Whether when assessee is compensated for discontinuing relationship with multilateral audit firm and remains an independent player, penalty is warranted for declaring such payments directly credited in accounts of partners and not firm as capital receipt - YES, rules ITAT

ASSESSEE is a firm of Chartered Accountants and carrying on the auditing profession. Assessee had shown a sum of Rs.1,15,70,000/- in the capital account of the partners as received from an international consultancy firm Deloitte International. The amount was not reflected by the assessee in its P&L a/c but directly credited to partners' accounts.

Customs

Used computers are not Hazardous Waste: CESTAT

THIS is a case booked by DRI. The appellants had imported used computers and the same were confiscated on the ground that the goods imported are nothing but Hazardous Waste and their import is prohibited. Confiscation has also been ordered on the ground of mis-declaration holding that the impugned goods have been declared as computer system whereas they are e-waste.

See our columns Tomorrow for the judgements

Until Tomorrow with more DDT

Have a Nice Day.