Notification No. 60 /2010-Customs Central Government hereby rescinds the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), no. 25/2010-Customs, dated the 27th February, 2010, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 138(E) dated the 27th February, 2010, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such rescission.
exempts Raw cotton falling under Heading No. 16 of the Second Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), when exported out of India, from so much of the duty of customs leviable thereon which is specified in the said Second Schedule as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate of Rs 2500 per tonne.
Recently, the Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) in the case of Royal Bank of Canada (A.A.R No 816 of 2009) has held that the profits / losses on futures and options contracts (derivative transactions) carried out by Canadian entity would be in the nature of ‘Business Income’. Further since the entity did not have a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India, as per Article 5 of the India-Canada tax treaty (the tax treaty), the Business Income of the applicant would not be taxable in India.
The Inland Revenue (now HMRC) in the United Kingdom (UK) in the Gaines-Cooper case has clarified the rules in respect of determining tax residency in the UK. The Decision-The case was not about the residence status of the taxpayers as such, but rather an application for judicial review on the basis HMRC had, in effect, “moved the goalposts” in the middle of the game by changing the rules for determining a tax payer’s residence status.
Recently, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (ACIT vs Harashima Naoki Tashio, ITA No. 4634/Del/) has held that the employer’s contribution towards the social security in the home country of the employee is not taxable in the hands of the employee as a perquisite.
The Delhi High Court (CIT Vs. Dr. Percy Batlivala [ ITA No. 13 08/2008]) has held that in respect of the expatriate employee sent on deputation to India, the amount of hypothetical tax representing the difference between the tax liability in the home country of the expatriate and in India should not be added to the salary income of such expatriate taxable in India.
The Finance Bill, 2010 (the Bill) was presented by the Finance Minister (FM) before the Lok Sabha ( The lower house of Parliament of India ) with certain amendments. This Flash News gives a snapshot of the key amendments to the Bill as passed by the Lok Sabha. The Bill including these amendments will become law only after they are passed by the Rajya Sabha (The upper house of Parliament of India ) and thereafter receive the assent of the President of India.
References have been received from field formations on the issue of levy of Education Cess and higher Education Cess on the Central Excise duty determined under Notification No. 17/2007-CE dated 1-3-2007 under compound levy scheme on S.S. Patta/Patti and Aluminium Circles.
It was realised that defining goods (and even artificially) would solve problems. It did. But now the trend has become too often to give artificial definition by incorporating deeming clause through the word ‘includes’. The concept of ‘manufacture’ which is fundamental in central excise is inclusive. Section 2(f) of the Excise Act says manufacture includes any process, – (i), (ii), (iii). In Chapter 39 for plastics in the sub-heading note-2 plasticiser includes secondary plasticiser. There are umpteen such inclusive definitions in excise.
The law on nomination of shares held in companies has taken a new meaning with perhaps the first interpretation of the provisions governing nomination in the Companies Act, 1956 by the Bombay high court. Interpreting Section 109A of the Companies Act, the court has ruled that the rights of a nominee to shares of a company would override the rights of heirs to whom property may be bequeathed.
