Kind attention is invited to Department of Revenue Circular No.12/2003, dated 25th February, 2003 under which names of various fictitious/non-existent companies reported by Commissioner of Customs(Preventive), New Delhi were circulated reporting that these companies were trying to avail duty drawback by showing export. Names of 27 companies which had come to adverse notice of Commissioner of Customs( Preventive), New Delhi had also been enclosed with the circular.
The first HYR will be for the half year ended September 2003, which has to be submitted to SEBI by the FIIs through their custodians’ latest by December 15, 2003.
When the custodian makes a request for rendering of services of Customs officers beyond working hours, he will be required to pay only for the block periods for which the services were requisitioned irrespective of the number of importers/exporters documents handled during that period . The custodian , in turn , will, for administrative convenience, divide the amount equally amongst all the importers/exporters whose work was attended to during this period,irrespective of number of documents of each importer/exporter on the value or weight of the consignments.
Kind attention is invited to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Chennai vs. M/s. Yeses International [2001 (133) ELT 526 (SC)], on the above subject. As indicated in Para 6 of the said judgment, as regards the demurrage charges, counsel for the Department had stated that they cannot be included in the assessable value.
Representations have been received by this office that in case of export of pharmaceutical formulations under DEPB, sometimes rate is worked out in fractions when calculated as per the formula prescribed by the Policy Circular No.20 dated 31.7.2002. They have further stated that as per existing practice, the DEPB entitlement rate is rounded off to the nearest digit. However, while verifying the DEPB, some Customs authorities are reducing the DEPB amount in respect of cases where the rate has been rounded off to the higher side but where the rate has been rounded off on the lower side, there is no increase allowed in the DEPB amount.
An issue has been raised whether a firm/person who are undertaking activities of organising “Trade Fairs” and Exhibitions soliciting the participation from the trade and Industry and provides space or may in addition provide furniture, cabins, security, electricity, etc., and charge their customers accordingly fall within ambit of “Event Management” or not
A point has also been raised that proviso to section 49(2) of the Act permits the importer to get the markings done as per the metric system within 6 months of import. It is , however, clarified that this proviso applies to markings on commodities only & not to any weight or measure imported as such.
I am directed to say that the issue whether the amount of “Dharmada” collected from the buyers by the assessee is includible in the assessable value or not has been subject matter of dispute in a number of cases. Recently, this issue again came up before the Hon”ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 7900-7902/95 in the case of CCE, Allahabad v. M/s. Panchmukhi Engg. Works & Ors. and the Hon”ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 28-11-2002 allowed the appeals in favour of Revenue.
These instructions are issued under Regulation 20A of SEBI (Foreign Institutional Investors) Regulations, 1995 and shall come in force with immediate effect.
This circular is being issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 11 (1) of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, read with Section 10 of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956,
