News Update

GST Compensation - Centre borrows Rs 6K Crore for 16 StatesFATF decides to keep Pakistan in grey listNTPC allowed to use drones for research and inspection of Power ProjectsIndia crosses landmark of 10 crore COVID-19 testsCBIC notifies Customs Authority for Advance Rulings in Delhi and MumbaiCus - Whether benefit u/s 28(2) is available - It is certainly not appropriate for the Bench to go into disputed questions of facts in writ proceedings: HCCus - Seeking directions to order for re-export - Since proceedings are on-going for assessment, it would not be appropriate to consider or grant the mandamus as sought: HCCus - Interpretation, by Revenue, of phrase 'in existence' in s.149 to mean that only if documents relied upon by petitioner seeking amendment were, in fact, 'on record' that such amendment could even be considered is disagreed with: HCCus - Seizure of areca nut - 'Reasons to believe' must be based upon acceptable materials, which have to be more than a moonshine: HCCus - Betel Nuts - Reasons given for seizure fail the test of 'Wednesbury principles' as no reasonable person can reach a conclusion about country of origin upon examination by naked eye: HCCBDT posts Sukhad Chaturvedi, IRS & Bhanu Pratap Singh, IRS as OSDs in FT&TR Division (See 'http://taxindiainternational.com/index.php')CBDT diverts DC-level post from Hyderabad to Bengaluru APA (See 'http://taxindiainternational.com/index.php')CBDT issues details Instructions for filing ITRs for AY 2020-21Income tax raids 15 places in Srinagar and DelhiIRS officer Amit Gupta goes to Uttarakhand Govt as Advisor, SGSTLate fees u/s 234E cannot be levied when processing TDS statements for a period when enabling provisions were not in effect: ITATPenalty order issued u/s 271(1)(c) merits being quashed where it does not specify as to which sub-section has been invoked to initiate such proceedings: ITATTo boost shipbuilding in India, Govt amends Right of First Refusal licensing conditionsAdditions framed by AO are unsustainable where based on apprehension of assessee having unauthorisedly claimed deduction u/s 36(1)(vi) twice: ITATCBDT notifies minor amendments in sub-rule (2) of Rule 67Cus - Penalty imposed on employee of CHA for alleged abetment of mis-declaration of imported goods, is unsustainable where such person was acting on orders & no collusion or abetment is established: CESTATBrazil revokes permission to Chinese vaccine trialG-20 Anti-Corruption Working Group - MoS reiterates India's zero telerance policyST - Mere reference to a paragraph in the SCN does not constitute a proper adjudication that devolves upon the original authority: CESTATJoe Biden promises Commission to recommend changes to Supreme CourtBihar Polls - BJP manifesto promises 19 lakh jobs + free-vaccination for COVID-19 + lentils under MSPTax Returns & Politicians - They necessarily make quaint & strange bedfellows!
APPENDIX-III

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

APPENDIX-III

EXTRACTS FROM THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-FOURTH AMENDMENT) ACT, 1978

* * * * * *

1. Short title and commencement:- (1)* * *

(2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act.

* * * *

3. Amendment of article 22:-

In article 22 of the Constitution,-

(a) for clause (4), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:-

'(4) No law providing for preventive detention shall authorise the detention of a person for a longer period than two months unless an Advisory Board constituted in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief Justice of the appropriate High Court has reported before the expiration of the said period of two months that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention:

Provided that an Advisory Board shall consist of a Chairman and not less than two other members, and the Chairman shall be a serving Judge of the appropriate High Court and the other members shall be serving or retired Judges of any High Court:

Provided further that nothing in this clause shall authorise the detention of any person beyond the maximum period prescribed by any law made by Parliament under sub-clause (a) of clause (7).

Explanation:- In this clause, "appropriate High Court" means,-

(i) in the case of the detention of a person in pursuance of an order of detention made by the Government of India or an officer or authority subordinate to that Government, the High Court for the Union territory of Delhi;

(ii) in the case of the detention of a person in pursuance of an order of detention made by the Government of any State (other than a Union territory), the High Court for that State; and

(iii) in the case of the detention of a person in pursuance of an order of detention made by the administrator of a Union territory or an officer or authority subordinate to such administrator, such High Court as may be specified by or under any law made by Parliament in this behalf.';

(b) in clause (7),-

(i) sub-clause (a) shall be omitted;

(ii) sub-clause (b) shall be re-lettered as sub-clause (a); and

(iii) sub-clause (c) shall be re-lettered as sub-clause (b) and in the sub-clause as so re-lettered, for the words, brackets, letter and figure "sub-clause (a) of clause (4)" , the word, brackets and figure "clause (4)" shall be substituted.