News Update

Tax Refund Conundrum - Odyssey of Legal MisstepsI-T- AO not barred from issuing more than one SCN; Fresh SCN seeking information is not without jurisdiction, more so where HC itself directed re-doing of assessment: HCMurthy launches Capacity Building on Design and Entrepreneurship programCash, liquor & drugs worth Rs 110 Cr seized from Jharkhand ahead of pollsI-T- Appeal before CIT(A) (NFAC) is rightly dismissed where it has been delayed by over one year without just & reasonable cause: ITATPoll-induced stress: 2 Bihar officials die of heart attack at polling boothsSixth Edition of Commandants' Conclave held in PuneSome Gujarat villages keep away from polls over unfulfilled demands from governmentI-T- Re-assessment unsustainable, where based on third party statements & not corroborated by incriminating evidence: ITATRoof-hugging inflation nudges Argentina to print first lot of 10,000 notes of pesoI-T- Re-assessment invalidated where triggerred by change of opinion, on account of being based on material already available during original assessment: ITATInvestigation finds presence of ‘boys club’ strands of culture at American bank regulatorST - Civil work for construction of tower in port area, is exempt from tax as per Notfn No 25/2007-ST; constructing draining pipes for municipal corporation is not commercial activity & so no Service Tax is payable thereon: CESTATUS alleges Russia shipping oil to North Korea more than UN-fixed quotaCus - That appellants were aware of dutiable nature of Gold found from baggage & of procedure for declaration at Customs, reveals intent to smuggle said Gold without payment of tax - conditions for valid import of Gold not satisfied either; absolute confiscation upheld: CESTATUS cancels licence to some firms found exporting materials to HuaweiCX - Excise duty is determines based on how goods are cleared - What happens to goods post their removal, is not manufacturer's lookout, unless manufacturer is involved in fraud or wilful mis-declaration: CESTATRenewables accounted for 30% of global power supply in 2023: StudyCX - Manufacturer of Single Sugar Phosphate (SSP) meant for agricultural use, cannot be held liable for use of SSP for industrial purposes, by a tertiary purchaser of SSP: CESTATCLAT 2024 exams to be held on Dec 1ST - Since the demand itself is not sustainable, question of demanding interest and imposing penalty does not arise: CESTAT
 
Mandatory pre-deposit of fixed percentage of duty & penalty - Amended provisions of Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 do not apply for appeals filed and pending as on date of amendment: High Court

By TIOL News Service

ALLAHABAD, JUNE 16, 2015: RECENTLY, we carried an order by the Mumbai Tribunal [2015-TIOL-1093-CESTAT-MUM] holding that the amended provisions of pre-deposit would apply to all the appeals filed on or after the amendment, though the dispute pertains to the period prior to the amendment of the provisions. But what about the cases pending before the Tribunal as on the date of amendment?

In this case, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit Rs 25 lakhs against a demand of Rs 2.49 crores. The assessee contested that as per the amended provisions of Section 35F, the amount of pre-deposit is only 7.5% of the duty demand.

The Appellant relied on the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in the Case of Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Limited Vs. Union of India and Others, Appeal No. 1 of 2015 decided on 12.2.2015 wherein a Division Bench has opined that in view of the amended Section 35F, the benefit of deposit of 7.5% only must be extended to the appellant in appeal which had been filed prior to the enforcement of the amended Section 35F i.e. 6th August, 2014. Any other direction will be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

However, the High Court did not agree with the preposition as laid down in the said judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajasthan State Industrial Development & Investment Corporation Limited.

The High Court held that from a simple reading of Section 35F, which is not under challenge, it cannot be disputed that the provision of Section 35F as amended vide Finance Act 2 of 2014 w.e.f 6th August, 2014 will have no application on the appeals which were filed and were pending before the Tribunal prior to the said date.

It is settled law that if the language of the statute is simple and admits of only one meaning than no rule of interpretation is to be applied and the simple meaning has to be given effect to.

Accordingly, the High Court declined to interfere with the order of pre-deposit by the Tribunal.

In passing:  Also see Arjun Industries 2015-TIOL-1364-HC-RAJ-CUS.

(See 2015-TIOL-1449-HC-ALL-CX)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.