Commissioner of Customs (EP), Mumbai has brought to Board’s notice the Tribunal’s judgment in the case of M/s. Akai Impex Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [reported in 2003 (156) ELT 700 (Tri-Mumbai)]. In the said case, goods imported under the DEEC Scheme and cleared against advance licenses, without payment of duty, in terms of the provisions of Notification 204/92-Cus were sold by the importer without utilising the imported material in export production, as required in terms of the Notification conditions.
Kind attention is invited to the judgment dated 26-02-2002 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Madurai vs T.V.S. Srichakra Ltd. and the judgment dated 27-02-2002 in the case of CCE, Delhi Vs Maruti Udyog Ltd. [2002 (141) ELT 3 (SC)]. Vide the said judgment, appeals filed by the Department were dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, upholding that the sale price realised by the assessee is to be regarded as inclusive of excise duty and therefore, in arriving at the excisable value of the goods
I have been directed to enclose copy of the Hon’ble Supreme Court order dtd. 7th July, 2003 in CA Nos. 4151-4157/2001in the case of CC, Kolkata Vs M/s. Grand Prime Ltd. & Ors [reported in 2001 (137) ELT 795 (Tri-Kolkata)].
So far as refined, bleached and deodorized (RBD) palm oil/palmolein is concerned, the same should conform to the specifications of refined vegetable oil under category A.17.15 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1956. Such RBD palm oil/palmolein would be classified under sub-heading 15119010 of the Customs Tariff.
I am directed to refer to Board’s Circular No. 40/2002-Cus., dated 17/7/2002, on the above-mentioned subject, wherein various issues involved in finalisation of provisional assessment cases of marble imports were clarified. In the said Circular, para 2(d) contained guidelines on valuation of marble slabs and marble blocks. Subsequently, vide Circular No.45/2002-Cus, dated 23.7.2002 , it was decided that application of the para 2(d) of said Circular should be kept in abeyance.
All the Foreign Institutional Investors who do not deal in / issue Offshore Derivative Instrument against underlying Indian Securities shall submit a ‘Nil-Report’ as per Circular IMD/CUST/8/2003 dated August 8, 2003.
I am directed to refer to the notifications 69/2003-CE (NT) to 73/2003-CE (NT) all dated 15th September, 2003 on the subject cited above and to say that as a measure towards simplification of indirect tax procedures with the objective of reducing the complexities and the transaction cost, the monthly/ quarterly returns to be filed by the manufacturer of excisable goods have been reduced to a unified , single and a simplified one page return.
Attention is invited to Board’s Circular No.710/26/2003-CX dated 23rd April 2002 issued from F.No.390/198(M-2)/2002-JC wherein field formations were sensitized on the need to remove the deficiencies and inadequacies in the manner of filing departmental Appeals. As you are aware, an Expert Group under the Chairmanship Shri R.K. Tiwari, Chief Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise,
Circular No. 8/2003-Income Tax Finance Act, 2003 has amended section 206 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 with a view to provide for mandatory filing of returns relating to tax deduction at source by principal officers of companies responsible for deducting tax on computer media. For this purpose, the Board has been empowered to notify an appropriate scheme in the Official Gazette
An exporter exports a complete bus. The Chassis portion of the bus has been manufactured by using various parts, components, compressor for air-conditioner. The details as regards the duty incidence suffered on various inputs is provided in DBK-II and IIA supported by duty paying bills of entry.
