Corporate Law : The demand and acceptance is mandatory ingredients of section 7 of aforesaid act which cannot be overlooked at the time of lodging...
Corporate Law : Union Government promulgated Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019 on December 28, 2019. The Ordinance is eff...
Goods and Services Tax : When a services falls under the definition of intermediary, the provision of place of supply becomes different. Thus classificatio...
Income Tax : ‘Reason to believe’ is a mysterious term. Nobody knows what is reason to believe, or how to judicially determine the i...
Fema / RBI : Prospective companies and investors looking to enter India must carefully consider their options for investment and available aven...
It was a realist budget in the difficult economic and political environment. Effort was made towards fiscal consolidation, infrastructure development, revival of manufacturing sector, easing of credit facilities, direct transfer of subsidy etc. Major Tax proposals are as follows:
Hon’ble Finance Minister presented budget for FY 2011-12. Significant proposal are as follows; General: GDP is expected to grow in the region of 8.75% to 9.25%. The Minister spoken about fiscal consolidation and put up a target of 4.6% fiscal deficit. Government is also mooting liberalizing the FDI policy in the country, however no details was […]
With effect from 16.06.2005, Service Tax was levied on Club or Association Services. Club or Association was defined under Section 65(25a) as, Club or Association means any person or body of persons providing services, facilities or advantages, for a subscription or any amount to its members. The purpose of this paper to examine as to whether trade or industry association can be liable to pay Service Tax under this head or under any other head.
To Confiscate means to appropriate private property to public treasury. Thus after confiscation the goods becomes a property of the government and the government candeal with it as it wants. Through option of redemption fine, government offers to some person to take ownership of the goods. Redemption fine is not a penalty and it has no penal connotation. In Blue Dart Express v. Commissioner of Customs the Tribunal observed that redemption fine in lieu of confiscation is not a fine as understood in criminal jurisprudence. Redemption fine is not a penalty in that sense. It is only an option to the person to pay an amount in lieu of confiscation. It contains no penal connotation.
“Mens Rea” literally means a guilty mind. It is a cardinal principle of English Common Law is that a persons cannot be convicted and punished in a proceeding of a criminal nature unless it can shown that he had a guilty mind. The principle is self explanatory. A person should be punished for deliberate defiance of law, rather than something which didn’t do intentionally or something which happened accidently etc. Nevertheless, the principle is most misunderstood.
Under Central Excise law a Small Scale Industries (SSI) have been given some benefits in duty payments. However these benefits are not available when the SSI unit is manufacturing goods bearing Brand name or Trade name of another person. It has always been a question of great disputes as to what is the meaning of the Brand name or trade name, or when do we call goods as Branded goods and SSI benefit is not available. In absence of clear statutory guidelines, case law was developed by various pronouncements of the Tribunal.
The foreign agents provide service to the exporters. However the services are provided outside India. They meet the prospective buyer outside India, they promote the products of the exporter outside India. For Service Tax to be leviable and payable, the services must be provided “in India”, except in the state of Jammu & Kashmir.
It may be noted that rod/bar and wire falls under different heading of CETA. It means that the legislature have treated these two products as two distinct and different products. When the legislative intent of the Parliament is clear about treating these two products differently, it cannot be said that they are same products. The above “Test of different heading” was applied by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lal Woolen and Silk Mills Ltd. V/s CCE, Chandigarh [1999 (108) ELT 7(S.C.)], wherein the Hon’ble SC held,
The petitioner was being prosecuted for an offence under Customs Act for the last 12 years. The value of the offending goods was Rs. Eight lakhs (approx). 20% of the value of goods comes out to be approx 1.6 lakhs. The compounding authority comes to the conclusion that out of 1.6 lakhs and 10 lakhs, 10 lakhs is higher and hence imposed a compounding amount of Rs. 10 lakhs.
There was a settled position of law that revenue is bound by the its circulars or clarification issued under Section 37B of the Central Excise Act. The principle behind such legal proposition is very simple- is an assessee has acted based on a circular issued by revenue, the revenue must not be allowed in the court of law to plead that the circular is illegal and punish the assessee for following its own circular/instruction. By no stretch of imagination this proposition is unjust or illegal.
