THE CAG in its
report laid in Parliament on 18.02.2014 observed,
Section 275 of the Act prescribes certain time limits for completion of penalty proceedings to ensure that proceedings do not drag on indefinitely. However, the Act is silent on any time limit for initiation of penalties. Manual of Procedure (Vol-II) only prescribes that if the competent authority during the course of a proceeding under the Act is satisfied that the person is guilty of contravening the relevant statutory provisions, the penalty initiation should be carried out along with the assessment order. The initiation of penalty proceedings starts with issue of notice under section 274 of the Act .
CAG
sought to examine whether the initiation and levy of penalty had been done in a
routine manner or after due application of mind and found:-
From CAG's Report No. 28 of 2013 laid on the table of Parliament on 18.02.2014.1. There was hardly any appreciation of the cases attracting penalty. Proceedings were being initiated routinely in all cases where additions had been made in scrutiny assessments.2. Penalty proceedings are being initiated in every alternate scrutiny proceedings. It is not clear whether the large number of penal proceedings indicate real tax evasion cases or is a pointer towards confusion in the interpretation of the Act by the assessees and the ITO.
Foreign Trade Policy Extended
AS per para 1.2(a)
of the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2009-2014, the "FTP incorporating
provisions relating to export and import of goods and services, shall come into
force with effect from 27th August, 2009 and shall remain in force upto 31st
March, 2014 unless otherwise specified".
Now, this is
amended to extend the validity of the Policy till further orders . DGFT Notification No.69/(RE-2013)/2009-2014, Dated: February 19, 2014
HoP also
Extended
AS per para 1.1 of
the Handbook of Procedures, the compilations known as HBPv1, HBPv2 and
Schedule of DEPB rates, shall remain in force upto 31st March, except DEPB
scheme, which was in operation till 30th September, 2011."
Now,
this is amended to extend the validity of the HoP till further orders .
DGCEI
Notice to Bhartiya Janta Party
IF I were to be a
member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), I would have been aghast at the
DGCEI notice to my party – no, not for demanding Service Tax on the tickets for
Modi's rallies, but for mis-spelling my party's name. The DGCEI letter in three
places mentions the name of the party as BHARTIYA
JANTA PARTY. I have very little
respect for an investigating agency that cannot spell BHARATIYA and JANATA.
Calling the party JANTA is a serious insult. Surprisingly no BJP leader has
protested against being called JANTA instead of Janata – well, what's in a name?
Retirement Age of Babus to be
enhanced?
IN the last couple
of weeks there has been a strong rumour doing the rounds that the retirement age
of the Central Government employees will be increased to 65 or at least 62. We
have been flooded with calls and mails on the veracity of the rumour.
What
is the story?
The
Standing Committee on Social Justice And Empowerment (2013-2014)of the Ministry
of Social Justice And Empowerment submitted its 39th report to the Lok Sabha on
7.2.2014.
In
para 2.7 of the report, the Committee noted:
The
Committee also sought the views of the Ministry as to how the age group of 60-70
years of the population can be made more productive. The Ministry stated in a
written reply: -
"The National Policy of Senior Citizen recognises ‘Productive ageing' as key to ensuring well-being of the senior citizens. In this regard, the policy promotes measures to create avenues for continuity in employment and/or post retirement opportunities; setting up of a Directorate of Employment to enable seniors find re-employment opportunities; the age of retirement be reviewed by the Government due to increasing longevity and to re-employ people over the age of 60 years and encourage them to work till the age of 75 .Further, Special programmes will be designed and disseminated through the media in order to educate society to appreciate and respect the contribution of senior citizens, especially older women, in running the household. Similarly, senior Citizens will be motivated to contribute their experience and knowledge to integrate tradition with contemporary needs and transmit more effectively socio-cultural heritage to the grandchildren".
In
para 5 of its recommendations, the Committee recommended,
The Committee feel that with the increase in the life expectancy and relatively better state of health of people, the Government need to look at continuity of employment upto 65 years /or greater post retirement opportunities for the senior citizens so that the society continue to draw upon their experience and tap their talent. The Committee would like the Ministry to seriously consider the various options which would include reviewing the age of retirement, reemployment opportunities for the retired persons subject to their physical fitness and mental agility and setting up a Directorate of Employment and Rehabilitation for Senior Citizens .
It is
doubtful whether the concerned Government officers
have read the Committee's report, but obviously some people did read the report
and passed on the information that Government is going to increase the
retirement age.
If
somebody can tell the correct persons in Government that this will fetch votes
and seats in the next elections, maybe Government will consider the proposal.
After all everything is fair in elections!
Make NACEN a Premier Institution –
IRS Assn
THE IRS (Cus &
Excise) Association has represented to the Board to augment NACEN with resources
to meet the increased mandate of training under the new National Training Policy
2012 and the National Drug Policy. In course of time the department will have to
train 30000 more officers (12000 vacancies and 18000 new posts created by Cadre
Restructuring) in due course apart from the existing employees. Hence the
Association requested that NACEN, Faridabad and the 9 RTIs be provided with all
the manpower required and sufficient funds. The proposal to build a new campus
to train large batches of IRS (C&CE) Probationers should also be expedited.
It is
really unfortunate that the premier academy, which is recognised as a Centre of
Excellence, is starving for funds. Somehow the Board has no money for important
wings like NACEN and CESTAT!
The
IRS Association has made several other requests to the Board:
1. New Transfer Policy on par with Income Tax and not to make transfers till the Policy is in place.2. The Association has sent representations along with list of officers at Commissioner level working for more than 3 years in both sensitive and non sensitive charges. Nothing substantial was done and hence rotation may be done in the same stations immediately.3. Splitting DG-HRD in to DG-HRM and DG-Infrastructure.4. Senior Time Scale to 2009 Batch.5. Filling up of vacancies at JC/ADC level.6. Empanelment of 1987 batches onwards as JS.7. Expeditious implementation of Cadre restructuring:8. Holding of DPCs for promotion to Chief Commissioner.9. Transparency in dealing with deputation requests.
And
they have a very special request. Their President is posted in Kolkata. The
Association has passed a resolution in February 2013 urging the Board and FM to
transfer the President back to NCR-Delhi, but obviously nobody cares.
Is
the Board totally insensitive to staff grievances? Is Delhi reserved only for a
coterie who will spend their entire service in Delhi and around and will not
allow anybody else to come in – including the President of their Association?
The submissions made by the Association appear to be fair and genuine and should
have been acceded to in the normal course, without even a representation from
the Association.
But
why is the Board not able to do anything for the staff? There is a tremendous
amount of animosity against the Board Members among all the employees, who feel
that Board Members having reached the top are not bothered about the lower level
officers.
Just
yesterday, I met a 2004 batch IRS officer who was deeply frustrated that she is
not yet promoted as Joint Commissioner. Standing smiling near her was a 1993
Superintendent who is still a Superintendent!
Transport Allowance to Deaf and
Dumb Employees – Government implements Supreme Court Order
THE 6th Central
Pay Commission recommended that physically disabled employees shall continue to
draw the transport allowance at double the normal rates. Following that,
Ministry of Finance issued an OM dated 29.8.2008 stipulating that the blind or
orthopedically handicapped employees, in terms of Ministry of Finance's order
vide OM dated 3.10.1997, shall continue to draw the allowance at double the
normal rates. The Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment again approached
the Ministry of Finance in February 2013 requesting to consider the issue of
grant of double transport allowance to hearing handicapped employees.
Pleas
made by the deaf and dumb persons, fell into deaf ears in all these yearsuntil
they approached the Supreme Court.
The
Supreme Court in its Order in Writ Petition No. 107/2011 dated 12.12.2013,
observed, "The deaf and dumb persons have an inherent dignity and the right
to have their dignity respected and protected is the obligation on the State.
Human dignity of a deaf and dumb person is harmed when he is being marginalized,
ignored or devalued on the ground that the disability that he suffers is less
than a visually impaired person which, in our view, clearly violates Article 21
of the Constitution of India. Comparison of disabilities among “persons of
disabilities”, without any rational basis, is clearly violative of Articles 14
of the Constitution of India. In our view, the recommendation made by the
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare for extending the benefit of transport
allowance to the Government employees suffering from hearing impairment in equal
with blinds and orthopaedically handicapped Government employees is perfectly
legal and is in consonance with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Under such circumstances, we are inclined to allow this writ petition and direct
the Respondents to grant transport allowance to deaf and dumb persons also on
par with blinds and orthopaedically handicapped employees of Central and the
State Governments and other establishments wherever such benefits have been
extended to the blinds and orthopaedically handicapped employees."
In
compliance of the Supreme Court Order, the Government has decided to extend the
benefit of double transport allowance to deaf and dumb employees of the Central
Government with immediate effect.
Jurisprudentiol – Friday's
cases
CST and Rajasthan Sales Tax
Exemption to new industrial units:
where Statute contains both General Provision as well as specific provision,
latter must prevail: SC
IF in a Statutory
Rule or Statutory Notification, there are two expressions used, one in General
Terms and the other in special words, under the rules of interpretation, it has
to be understood that the special words were not meant to be included in the
general expression. Alternatively, it can be said that where a Statute contains
both a General Provision as well as specific provision, the later must prevail.
It leaves no doubt that what is specific has to be seen in contradistinction
with the other items/entries. The provision more specific than the other on the
same subject would prevail.
Income Tax
Whether a cricketer who plays for
India, is also professional actor if he acts in TV Commercials and is entitled
to Sec 80RR benefits - YES: ITAT
THE assessee was
working as officer in SBI and was a cricket player who played for the Country.
The assessee claimed certain amount received from various cricket tournaments,
awards and gifts and man of match awards as exempt in view of Board circular
No.447/199/1/86IT(A1) dated 22.01.1986. AO disallowed the claim observing that
in case of sportsman who is a professional, awards received by him shall be in
the nature of benefit in exercise of his profession and therefore, liable to tax
under the Income Tax Act. Assessee contended that he was not a professional
cricketer and he was playing for the country under the aegis of BCCI which
decided payments to be made to the players by way of fees, logo amount, share of
prize money etc., and he had no control over the matches played and amounts
received. CIT (A) allowed the claim of assessee stating that he was not a
professional. The appeal was only made in respect of man of match award of Rs. 3
lacs.
THE
issues before the Bench are - Whether the awards received by the assessee are
exempt from income tax as he is not a professional cricketer but playing under
the aegis of BCCI which decides the payments to be made to the players; Whether
assessee is entitled for expenditure incurred by him for sports accessories,
dress, equipment, coaching, training, travel & stay and Whether the assessee
is entitled for deduction u/s 80RR considering that even though he is a cricket,
the income for acting in T.V. / print media is received by him as a professional
actor. And the verdict partly goes in favour of the assessee.
Central Excise
Default in payment of duty under
Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 – Whether CENVAT Credit can be utilized
for payment of duty during default – Matter referred to Third Member for
deciding pre-deposit.: CESTAT
THIS is a case of
default in payment of Central Excise duty. As per Rule 8(3A) of the Central
Excise Rules, 2002, the assessee is required to pay duty consignment-wise,
without utilizing CENVAT Credit during default period. However, the assessee
continued to clear the goods by debiting the duty from CENVAT account.
Accordingly proceedings were initiated resulting in demand of Rs. 13,39,225/-
toward duty along with interest and penalties.
While
disposing the stay application, the Member (J) held:
For
the purpose of interim stay, we find that the Tribunal has considered the said
issue in number of decisions and has held that in case of default in payment of
duty in terms of Rule 8, subsequent utilization of Cenvat credit for clearance
of goods would result only in confirmation of demand of interest, inasmuch as
there would be no Revenue loss. Reference in this regard can be made to the
Tribunal's decision in the case of Solar Chemferts Pvt. Ltd. vs.
Commissioner 2011-TIOL-1968-CESTAT-MUM as also
to a latest decision of Ahmedabad Bench in the case of F.S. Engineers vs.
CCE, Ahmedabad (2013-TIOL-880-CESTAT-AHM). It
stands held by the Tribunal that in case of utilization of credit instead of
payment of duty in cash it results in loss to the Revenue only to the extent of
interest. To the same effect is the decision of Tribunal in the case of
Manipal Springs Ltd. vs. Commissioner (2012-TIOL-1708-CESTAT-BANG).
No comments:
Post a Comment