Circular No. 8 of 2007-Income Tax Reference is invited to Circular No. 11/2006, dated 16-11-2006 whereby the rates of deduction of income-tax from the payment of income under the head “Salaries” under section 192 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, during the financial year 2006-07, were intimated. The present Circular contains the rates of deduction of income-tax from the payment of income chargeable under the head
Removal of Structural Restrictions: Further, in order to afford issuers with desired flexibility in structuring of instruments to suit their requirements, it has been decided that structural restrictions currently placed on debt instruments such as those on maturity, put/call option on conversion, etc shall be removed.
I am directed to refer to Boards circular no. 736/52/2003-CX dated 11.08.2003 on the above subject. Vide this circular, the facility of self-sealing was extended to all categories of manufacturer-exporters. In this regard, references have been received from field formations that in spite of this facility being available to the exporters, a large number of exporters prefer stuffing and sealing of export containers in the presence of Central Excise officers.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996, the Principal Regulations were published in the Gazette of India on December 9, 1996 vide S.O. No. 856(E).
in sub-para (b) of para 2, for the words and figures the proper officer shall issue a certificate in Form C.T.-3 annexed to the notification as Annexure-VI in quadruplicate, the words and figures the proper officer shall issue a certificate in Form C.T.-3 annexed to the circular as Annexure-A in quadruplicate shall be substituted
It is clarified that para- 2 of the said circular stands amended to the extent that in case, credit taken on inputs used in the manufacture of the said goods cleared under notification No.14/2002-CE or notification No. 30/2004-CE, has been reversed before utilization, it would amount to credit not having been taken.
All time barred, pending or rejected applications which were filed after six months from end of the option period as exercised by the applicant, but are now within a period of 12 months from end of the originally exercised option period, should be processed as per amended para 8.3.1(ii) of HBP,
I am directed to invite your attention to Board’s circular No. 809/6/2005-CX dated 01.03.2005, wherein the procedure relating to sanction and pre-audit of refund/rebate claims has been prescribed. It has been brought to the notice of the Board that various court judgments have held that the procedure of pre-audit before sanction of refund amounts to interference with the quasi-judicial function of the refund sanctioning authority
Representations have now been received on the difficulties in operation of this provision and accordingly the trade bodies /Associations have requested to provide more flexibility to the exporters so as to enable them to destroy such imported material after payment of applicable customs duty and interest in the event of non-fulfilment of export obligation.
Sub-rule (9) of Rule 7 of the said Rules, provides for seizure of infringing goods, if there are reasons to believe that the goods are liable to confiscation in terms of section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962. In this context, it may please be borne in mind that Customs is enforcing laws in personam while protecting intellectual property rights. Thus it is important to make sure that the right holder participates in the Customs proceedings. In case the right holder abstains, the Customs have no obligation to continue with the detention and the goods shall be released forthwith, if otherwise in order.
