News Update

FM reviews CAPEX of CPSEsGovt writes to over 2800 corporates to clear MSME duesGovt carrying out reforms in every sector of economy to prop up growth: PMIgnoring limitation proves costlyInverted duty structure - A Case study (See 'TOG Insight' in promotes four officers as Pr Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise + posts Sameer Pandey as DS in GST Council SecretariatSC cannot be a place for Govts to walk in when they choose, ignoring period of limitation prescribed - Petition dismissed as time barred; costs imposed on State for wasting judicial time - amount to be recovered from officers responsible: SCIs penalty compulsorily attracted on late payment of GST?No mutation of COVID-19 detected in India: Health MinisterCus - Goods re-imported for repair and re-exported - Merely because Assessee could claim duty drawback later on and it may give rise to a revenue neutral situation, it cannot be said that period of one year prescribed in 158/95-Cus is without any meaning: HCST - Payment of mobilization advance is a separate financial transaction within contract for providing of service & so is not to be included in gross taxable value as per Section 67 of Finance Act 1994 - duty demand cannot be raised thereon when there is no allegation of any part of contracted value having evaded taxation: CESTATBSVI introduction a revolutionary step: JavadekarCX - It is settled position in law that an assessee is entitled to interest on delayed disbursal of refund after three months from date of filing of refund claim till date of its realisation: CESTATCus - Drawback - After turning down request for taking test samples, Revenue cannot brush aside report given by an expert Committee simply for the reason that sample was not drawn and referred by Department: CESTATPayment made to a trust formed for the benefit of employees of the company, of which the assessee was a shareholder & whose shares the assessee had sold, does not qualify as expenditure incurred wholly in connection with transfer of asset: HCBogus purchases - only the profit element embedded therein is to be disallowed, rather than the entire quantum of purchases made: ITATSearch assessment is invalid where it is completed even before search operations are conducted or where any material incriminating the assessee has not yet been found: ITATWhere assessee did not claim exemption in respect of one residential property, the assessee can avail such benefit in respect of a second house or plot of land: ITATIndia successfully test-fires cruise missile from Indian Navy’s destroyer INS ChennaiCOVID-19: Global tally goes past FOUR Crore with 11.15 lakh deaths; America has close to 27 lakh active cases against 8 lakh in IndiaCOVID-19 - Almost 80% new cases coming from 10 StatesCountrywide S&T infrastructure facilities to be accessible to industry & startups: GovtPM calls for speedy access to vaccines once readyNew Zealand PM earns second term for managing COVID-19 wellDigital Media - Govt to extend all benefits available to othersGovt not considering any DA for Govt employees: GangwarCBDT issues transfer order of 395 Addl / JCITs on All India basisSBI given nod for sale of electoral bonds for 10 daysEducation CESS - the spoilt fruit
Carelessness in drafting notifications

JULY 21, 2015

By M K Gupta, IRS (Retd.)

THE Central Government has recently issued three Central Excise notifications 34-36/2015 all dated 17 th July, 2015 amending various existing notifications. These notifications amend conditions for availing benefit of exemption from duty. The amended conditions are as below:

"Provided that the said excisable goods are manufactured from inputs or by utilising input services on which appropriate duty of excise leviable under the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) or additional duty of customs under section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) or service tax under section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994) has been paid and no credit of such excise duty or additional duty of customs on inputs or service tax on input services has been taken by the manufacturer of such goods (and not the buyer of such goods), under the provisions of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.".

2. As can be seen from the above, one of the conditions is that the excisable goods are manufactured from inputs on which appropriate duty of excise leviable under the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. The question is there any authority under the said Act to levy duty of excise?

3. Article 265 of the Constitution provides that no tax shall be levied without the authority of law. Law means an Act passed by the Parliament which authorizes levy and collection of tax. There is no such provision under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Section 2 of the said Act states that the rates at which duties of excise shall be levied under the Central Excise Act, 1944 are specified in the First Schedule. In other words duty is leviable under Central Excise Act, 1944 at the rates specified in the said Schedule. Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides for levy of duty at the rates specified in the Schedules of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

4. From the above analysis of legal provisions, it is crystal clear that the duty of excise is leviable under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Hence condition prescribed in the aforesaid notifications, is not legally sustainable.

5 Further the amending notifications mention "service tax under section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994)" This section is not applicable since 1.7.2012. The service tax is levied under Section 66 B.

6. It is settled law that to avail exemption under a notification, the conditions must be strictly satisfied. How can a taxpayer satisfy the conditions which are beyond the four corners of law?

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the sites)


Sub: Transparency in drafting rules

Very often in India it is viewed that the more complex,circuitous and unintelligible a law the more perfect it is. In the name of abstractness they are creating chaos in the field of taxation. Why these people can't state it in lucid terms and say by a circular look this is the law we intend to bring and we want to remove the mischief existing in the present practice. When these so called legal pundits people will understand what is meant by transparency and clarity.

Posted by harinarayanan thekkekalathil