TIOL-DDT 444
07 09 2006
Thursday
There are many officers in the department, who do not know whether to look in the Tariff or manual for a particular notification. There was a particularly bright Assistant Commissioner who had this same problem and he would ask his inspector to put up to him the books with the notifications properly flagged.
CBEC has appointed certain commissioners to adjudicate certain specific DRI cases.
As per Notification Nos 101 to 104/2006 ,
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 and sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise and Customs hereby appoints the Commissioner of Customs, Goa and authorises him to exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed, to act as, -
i. The Commissioner of Customs, Port Imports, Chennai; and
ii. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa,
Please note that under the Customs Act, somebody is appointed as Central Excise officer. Does the Customs Act empower somebody to be appointed a Central Excise officer? Shouldn’t a Commissioner of Central Excise be appointed under the Central Excise Act?
Notification Nos 96 – 104/Cus.(N.T), Dated: September 5, 2006
Can DRI adjudicate cases – if yes, why they don’t?
DRI and DGCEI, the premier investigation agencies of the department go round booking cases, gather tons of paper from the assessees and importers, record huge statements and prepare lengthy Show Cause Notices, but finally they leave adjudication to the respective Customs or Central Excise commissioners? Why? One good reason may be 100% success rate for no commissioner drops a case booked by DRI or DGCEI! If an elaborate Show Cause Notice running into more than 50 pages ( that is the normal size of a DRI/CEI Show Cause Notice) starting with what you do with a swipe card as stated in his voluntary statement given before ……… ending with the condemnation that he is liable to pay the duty amounting to a few Crores. If the magnum opus can be prepared, why can’t somebody in the directorate pass an order? After all it will save a lot of typing. All that you have to do is replace “it appears” in the Show Cause Notice with “it is clear” and confirm whatever is demanded. Your job is over and finished. But it’s never done; the Show Cause Notices are invariably made answerable to the jurisdictional commissioner.
Does the DRI and DGCEI have the power to adjudicate? If they have they should instead of throwing it at the commissioners. If they don’t have the power, they should not issue Show Cause Notices also. That should be done by the adjudicating authorities. In Circular No. 752/68/2003-CX., dated 1-10-2003, the Board emphatically clarified that the show cause notice shall be approved in writing and signed by the officer competent to adjudicate the said show cause notice.
So DRI and DGCEI officers who sign Show Cause Notices should be sure that they are competent to adjudicate the case and that brings us back to the original question, “if they can, why they don’t?”
And then what is the purpose of giving notifications for adjudicating individual cases? Why can’t we appoint 4 commissioners only to adjudicate DRI cases instead of frequent notifications?
Doing Business 2007: India and Pakistan are top reformers in South Asia
Doing business became easier in India and Pakistan in 2005-2006, according to a new report by the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation (IFC)
India implemented reforms to simplify business registration, cross-border trade, and payment of taxes, as well as easing access to credit and strengthening investor protection. Although the reforms improved India's ranking over last year's, it still ranks relatively low at 134 and lies 41 places after China-which is reforming at a faster pace than India.
Top 10 reformers
Georgia, Romania, Mexico, China, Peru, France, Croatia, Guatemala, Ghana, and Tanzania.
Top ranked countries in our region
Maldives (53) and Pakistan (74), followed by Bangladesh (88), Sri Lanka (89), Nepal (100), and India (134). Bhutan (138) and Afghanistan (162) are ranked lowest in the region.
The top 30 economies in the world
Singapore, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, Hong Kong(China), the United Kingdom, Denmark, Australia, Norway, Ireland, Japan, Iceland, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Lithuania, Estonia, Thailand, Puerto Rico, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Korea, Latvia, Malaysia, Israel, St. Lucia, Chile, South Africa, and Austria.
How India improved
India cut the time to start a business from 71to 25 days and reduced the corporate income tax rate from 36.59 percent to 33.66 percent. A Supreme Court decision made enforcing collateral simpler-easing access to credit. New risk management procedures in customs lowered import time by two days and exports by nine days. And reforms to stock exchange rules toughened investor protections.
Who will benefit?
Whatever reformers do, they should always ask the question, Who will benefit the most? If reforms are seen to benefit only foreign investors, or large investors, or bureaucrats-turned-investors, they reduce the legitimacy of the government.
"Reforms should ease the burden on all businesses: small and large, domestic and foreign, rural and urban. This way there is no need to guess where the next boom in jobs will come from. Any business will have the opportunity to thrive," Simeon Djankov, one of the authors of the report.
Until tomorrow with more DDT
Have a nice day.
Mail your comments to vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com
