TIOL-DDT 2278
23.01.2014
Thursday

CAUTION to the Bribe Takers: If you are taking bribes in bank notes with the signature of the RBI Governor, be careful and check every note to ensure that it has been issued after 2005, for the Reserve Bank of India has decided to withdraw completely all bank notes issued prior to the year 2005.

Come April and the citizens of the Republic will be required to exchange these notes from Banks which will provide the exchange facility until further communication.

It is not as if these notes will cease to be legal tender – only thing is after 1st July 2014, if you want to exchange more than 10 pieces of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 notes, non-customers will have to furnish proof of identity and residence to the bank branch in which she/he wants to exchange the notes. Means if you are exchanging more than Rs. 15,000 – big brother will watch you.

RBI has appealed to the Public not to panic and requested them to actively co-operate in the withdrawal process.

What is the provocation behind this sudden proposal to withdraw the pre-2005 notes? Is to curb black money? Is the timing lethal – just before the General Elections? It is no secret that thousands of Crores (of black money) will be in circulation during the elections and in the distribution channels, counting of notes is a rare occurrence. And actually there is cut at source at every stage – for example if a Thousand Crores is to be sent to a State, actually only 900 Crores will go and when the 900 crores go to the Districts only about 800 crores will go – finally only about 500 Crores reach the voters. Well, this is a respectfully accepted loot in the trade and nobody complaints. Now, with millions of units of currency notes to be put in circulation, who will have the time and a safe place to check whether the notes were issued prior to 2005 or after. At least at that last level, people may refuse to accept the pre-2005 notes. What will they then do with all those bundles of pre-2005 notes? Can they exchange them in the banks during the thick of elections? Will the post 2005 notes now carry a premium in the market? And will the pre 2005 notes suffer a discount? And maybe the 100 rupee notes issued prior to 2005 will carry a premium as hassles like proof of identity and residence are applicable only for 500 and 1000 rupee notes.

If the whole Scheme is to discourage black money and misuse of money during elections, it is a laudable step – at least it will leave our wily politicians confused during the time when they need black money most – and there will be less money to spend during the 2014 elections and perhaps we can witness a more democratic election.

But will the RBI advisory be allowed to be implemented – if the politicians come to know about the implications, they will certainly ensure that the advisory is withdrawn or at least suspended till the elections are over to form the Government "buy the people".

How do you identify notes issued prior to 2005? It is very easy. Notes issued prior to 2005 do not have the year of printing on the reverse side of the note.

I checked in about Rs. 30,000 worth notes with me withdrawn from my bank during this month and I found that every one of them had the year of issue printed (obviously issued after 2005) and I am happy that all my notes are legal tender even after April, July 2014 and thereafter.

See from these pictures

From now on, whenever you give a note, the recipient will see the reverse side and see if the year of issue is printed; he may not accept it if the year is not printed – a tough task indeed if you deal with too much of cash. And will this not create a scare, even if the RBI has asked us not to panic?

RBI Press Release 2013-2014/1472., Dated: January 22, 2014

Customs - Drawback Schedule Amended

THE Government has changed the drawback rates and Cap rates for several items in the drawback schedule. Notification No. 98/2013-Cus NT dated 14.09.2013 is amended.

Notification No.05/2014-Cus. (NT) Dated: January 21, 2014

Pagination not done, memo of appeal does not bear signature etc. – since defects not cured in spite of giving several opportunities, appeal dismissed in terms of Rule 11 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982

IN the matter of an appeal filed, the appellant was directed to make good the following defects, namely:

(i) Pagination not done;

(ii) Verification clause incomplete;

(iii) All copies of memo of appeal do not bear signature of the appellant.

A reminder was also sent to the appellant to cure these defects.

When the case came up for hearing, none represented, and the defects, thus, remained uncured.

Therefore, another notice was sent directing the appellant to cure the defects.

The matter again came up for hearing and the Bench observed –

"3. When the case was called today, none appeared for the appellant nor is there any compliance report with respect to the defects. In view of the above, I dismiss the appeal in terms of Rule 11 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982."

See 2014-TIOL-116-CESTAT-MUM

Neeta Lall Butalia, Commissioner of Customs among WCO Awardees

CBEC has announced the "World Customs Organization (WCO) Certificate of Merit" on the occasion of the International Customs Day 2014. The awardees are

1. Shri Ashok Kumar Mehta, Additional Director General, NACEN, Faridabad

2. Ms. Neeta Lall Butalia, Commissioner of Customs (I & G), New Delhi

3. Dr. Tej Pal Singh, First Secretary (Trade), Embassy of India, Brussels

4. Dr. M. Mathew Jolly, Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Mumbai

5. Shri Hitesh Ajit Shah, Additional Director, Risk Management Division, Mumbai

6. Shri Rajiv Kapoor, Additional Commissioner, JNCH, Mumbai

7. Shri. Reyaz Ahmed, Additional Director, DRI Hqrs, New Delhi

8. Shri K. Ramakrishnan, Director (Anti Smuggling), CBEC, New Delhi

9. Shri Dheeraj Rastogi, Additional Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate, New Delhi

10. Shri. Ravi Pratap Singh, Director (Customs), CBEC, New Delhi

11. Shri. Avinash Pushkarna, Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Rohtak

12. Dr. Shobhit Jain, Joint Commissioner, IGI Airport, New Delhi

13. Shri Shalabh Katiyar, Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Kolkatta-II

14. Shri D. Ranjith Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, Custom House, Tuticorin.

15. Shri Harish Chand Saini, Superintendent, Directorate General of Safeguards, New Delhi

16. Shri. Pankaj Kumar, Inspector, CC Unit, Delhi Customs Zone.

The CBEC wants these officers to be in Delhi on 27th January 2014 to receive the certificates. Anyway 10 of the 16 awardees are in Delhi or nearby, but will the officer in Brussels be able to fly in or has he been informed earlier?

CBEC O.M in F No. 21000/2/2014-IC (ICD)., Dated: January 21, 2014

Vishnu told Arjuna go do your dharma, but he told Kejriwal, go do your dharna

THE Finance Minister P Chidambaram said this in an interview with NDTV at Davos yesterday, where he represents India at the 44th World Economic Forum. Asked if he could be a Prime Ministerial candidate, Chidambaram said, "I am certain if the Congress is called to form the government, Rahul Gandhi will be PM. Rahul had enough fire in the belly". PC admitted that the Congress party appears to be the underdog today, "but I think it is good to go into an election as an underdog rather than in a triumphant mood."

On Kejriwal, Chidambaram said that dharna on the streets is not governance – "That is abdicating governance. If you don't know how to govern, quit,"

Who was the better actor?

LEGENDARY Thespian Akkineni Nageswara Rao who died at Hyderabad at the age of 91, was waiting in the Customs lounge of an airport when the customs officers were interrogating a passenger about some contraband being carried by the passenger. The passenger was pleading that he was innocent and Nageswara Rao was feeling bad the Customs officers are harassing an innocent passenger. After about an hour of interrogation, the passenger broke and confessed to the crime and showed the Customs where the contraband was hidden. An astonished Nageswara Rao told the Customs officers, "how well the smuggler acted – and I thought I was a great actor!"

Jurisprudentiol – Friday's cases

Kerala GST

Order passed by Deputy Commissioner without giving enough time to assessee to reply – matter remanded: SC

DEPUTY Commissioner ought to have given some more time to the appellant to file his reply and explain in detail as to why the order passed by the assessing authority should not be modified. The right to file a reply has been considered to be an indispensible facet of right to proper hearing. The maxim of audialterampartem is an epitome of general principles governing fair hearing. The principle of fair hearing has two justiciable elements. The first is that an opportunity of hearing must be given and the second is that the opportunity must be reasonable and adequate. The opportunity of hearing requires to be tested on the anvil of reasonableness and adequacy of such opportunity. The right to file an adequate reply and represent one's case before the decision-making authority shelters under the second limb. In a case where huge tax liability is being imposed on an assessee, he has a right to file a reply and represent his case before the adjudicating authority. Should such sufficient opportunity not be afforded to the assessee, he would be deprived of his valuable right. Case remanded to the Deputy Commissioner.

Income Tax

Whether single transaction can be construed as business transaction when motive behind such transaction was to make Investment - NO: ITAT

THE assessee wrote off a sum of Rs.15 lakh in its Profit and loss account. The AO observed that the assessee was earlier engaged in the trading of suiting & shirting and thereafter, it started trading in shares and securities. According to the AO, the assessee was not engaged in the business of purchase and sale of land. The AO held that the said amount of Rs.15 lakh was not bad debt as the same was not incidental to the assessee's business. No relief was allowed in the first appeal.

The issues before the Bench are - Whether a single transaction can be considered as business transaction when the motive behind such a transaction was to make Investment; Whether the amount received on sale of shares can be considered as LTCG when the period of holding of shares was more than two years and the valuation of such shares was at the cost price in the respective balance-sheets from the date of purchase and Whether disallowance u/s 14A is attracted even when the securities fetching exempt income are held as stock in trade. And the verdict partly goes in favour of Revenue.

Customs

Tribunal, being an appellate body, has no authority to control functioning of Customs officer in particular Commissionerate - if Adjudicating authority has not followed direction of Commr(A), remedy lies in taking up matter with Executive Commissioner: CESTAT

IN this Customs case, the appellant was directed by the lower appellate authority to approach the adjudicating authority, who was required to pass a speaking order as per Section 17(5) [Assessment of duty] of the Customs Act, 1962.

The grievance of the appellant is that in spite of the said direction, the adjudicating authority has not passed the speaking order and hence, they are before the CESTAT with an early hearing application and an appeal.

See our Columns Tomorrow for the judgements

Until Tomorrow with more DDT

Have a nice day.

Mail your comments to vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com