No TDS on sum paid to NR which isn’t taxable as royalty or as business profits in absence of its PE

IT/ILT : Professional fee paid by assessee to non-residents was not royalty under section 9 of Act or under article 12 of respective DTAAs

Exp. on loan restructuring is business exp. as it is within sphere of and incidental to main busines

IT : Where loan taken is incidental to assessee's business, any expenditure incurred on restructuring of such loan does not result in an enduring benefit and is allowable as business expenditure

No concealment penalty for retro-amendment which confirmed two views on allowances

IT : No concealment penalty for retro-amendment which confirmed two views on allowances

IRDA releases new regulations for ‘places of business’

INSURANCE : IRDA (Places of Business) Regulations, 2013

IRDA makes Regulations on Non-Linked Insurance Products

Insurance : IRDA (Non-Linked Insurance Products) Regulations, 2013

Economic circumstances and functional similarity to be seen among comparables for TP analysis

IT/ILT : For carrying out comparability analysis, it is to be seen as to whether comparable company is comparable having regard to characteristic of property and service, functions performed, assets used and risk assumed

Sec. 54 relief can’t be declined merely because investment has not sprouted from the original sales

IT : Exemption claimed by assessee under section 54 cannot be denied on ground that assessee has not utilized sale consideration received from sale of flats itself, in purchasing a new residential house

Unfair to try ex-JV partner for alleged breaches of JV when such disputes were settled in his favour

CL : JV partner directed to buy out other JV partner's shares(return his investment with 8% interest) by CLB & HC(in appeal) in petition filed by the latter for oppression/mismanagement under section 397/398 and directed the former to repay Instead of complying with the CLB & HC orders, the former harassed the latter by filing criminal complaints on matters related to JV contractual disputes which were already settled by CLB & HC. This clearly amounts to abuse of process of law and criminal proc

Loss incurred by partner in a transaction entered into on behalf of firm isn't deductible in hands o

IT : Loss in foreign currency transaction entered by partner on behalf of firm from its account, cannot be claimed by individual partner as deduction

CIT can exercise revisionary power, if AO omits to examine the vital issues in the assessment order

IT : Where Assessing Officer had not raised any query on issue of non-deductibility of TDS on roaming charges paid by assessee-telecom service provider in assessment proceedings, it was a fit case for Commissioner to exercise his revisional jurisdiction

Call Centre services provided in relation to organization of bets are liable to service tax

ST/ECJ : Call Centre Services of providing staff, premises and telephone and computer equipment necessary to take bets do not amount to carrying out 'betting' transactions and, therefore, same is not covered in negative list under section 66D(i)

Order of SetCom to be rectified if authority failed to take into account some prima facie claims

IT : Where Settlement Commission passed an order of settlement without taking into consideration assessee's claim for unabsorbed depreciation, in view of fact that said issue was emergent from face of record and did not require any minute examination of accounts, application seeking rectification of impugned order passed by Commission was to be allowed

Corrigendum dated 30-05-2013

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE)

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi, the 30^th April, 2013

G.S.R. (E). – In the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 51/2012-Customs(ADD), dated the 3^rd December, 2012 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R.874 (E), dated the 3^rd December, 2012, in the Table,

(1) against S. No. 5, in columns (6) and (7), for the words

“M/s Kodak (China) graphics commounication system Ltd.”

read

“Kodak (China) Graphic Communication Company Limited”;

(2) against S. No. 6, in column (6), for the words

“M/s Kodak (China) graphics commounication system Ltd.”

read

“Kodak (China) Graphic Communication Company Limited”.

[F No. 354/45/2012-TRU]
(Akshay Joshi)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

DGFT Policy Circular No 01 (RE-2013/2009-14) dated 29-05-2013

Government of India

Ministry of Commerce and Industry

Directorate General of Foreign Trade
Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi

Policy Circular No 1 (RE-2013/2009-14)

Dated: 29^th May, 2013

To

All Regional Authorities/DCs

A reference has been received from trade seeking certain clarifications on admissibility of deemed export benefits under para 8.2(f) of FTP. The issues have been considered for issuance of appropriate clarifications under para 2.3 of FTP.

2. Chronological sequence is described as under:
   
   
   
   1. 21^st March, 2012: Notification No. 107(RE-2010)-2009-14
      
      
      This Notification inserted para 8.7 in the FTP. This para provided that notwithstanding any thing contained either in FTP or HBP vol.1, supply to Non-Mega Power Project shall not be entitled to any deemed export benefit.
      

      At the bottom of this Notification, under heading “Effect of this Notification” it was stated that when the Annual Supplement to FTP is brought out, the consequential changes of this decision will be reflected in the various provisions of Chapter 8 of FTP and also HBP vol.1

      
      
   
   
   2. 5^th June, 2012: Release of Annual Supplement to FTP
      

      In consequence to position given in para 2 (i) above, several changes were carried out in Chapter 8 of FTP in this Annual Supplement. Para 8.2(g) of FTP (which was related to deemed export benefits for supply of goods to Power Projects and Refineries not covered in para 8.2(f) of FTP) was deleted. Non-Mega Power Project were covered under para 8.2.(g) of FTP as Non-Mega Power Projects were not entitled for zero duty import and accordingly, in view of Notification given in para 2(i) above, this para was deleted. Similarly, provisions relating to deemed export benefits for Non-Mega Power Projects were also deleted from para 8.4.4(iv) of FTP.

      
      
   
   
   
   


3. Redrafting of para 8.2(f) in the Annual Supplement
   

   In the Annual Supplement released on 05.06.2012, para 8.2(f) was redrafted. This para was split in two parts. First para, 8.2(f)(i), allows deemed export benefits to supply of goods to any project or purpose which are entitled to import goods at zero customs duties in terms of the Notification No.12/2012-customs dated 17.03.2012. Second paragraph, 8.2.(f)(ii), elaborates that deemed exports benefits on such supply shall be available only if the supply is made under procedure of ICB. However, in regards to mega power project, the procedure of ICB is not required if the project has been awarded through tariff based competitive bidding or requisite quantum of power has been tied up through tariff based competitive bidding

   
   


4. Clarifications
   

   In view of the position explained above, following clarifications are issued:

   
   
   
   
   1. Deemed export benefits are not available for supplies to Non-Mega Power Projects.
   
   
   2. Para 8.2(f)(i) and para 8.2(f)(ii) of FTP are in continuation and hence to be read in conjunction. Para 8.2(f) (ii) of FTP lays down conditions in respect of supplies covered under para 8.2(f) (i) of FTP.
   
   
   3. Benefits of deemed exports under para 8.2(f) are available only if supplies are under ICB, except for Mega Power Projects. For Mega Power projects it could be ICB or other than ICB, as given in para 3 above. Para 8.3(c)(i) and para 8.4 of FTP (table given in this para) clearly provide that if supplies are under ICB, then such supplies are exempted from payment of TED. If supplies are not under ICB, then such supplies are eligible for refund.
   
   
   
   

This has been issued with the approval of DG.

(Jay Karan Singh)

Joint Director of Foreign Trade

File No.01/92/180/168/AM05/PC-VI

ROC may ask for declaration from directors that they won’t accept deposit in contravention of law, M

CL : Section 12 of the Companies Act, 1956 - Memorandum of Association - Mode of Forming Incorporated Company - Power of ROCs to Obtain Declaration/Affidavits from Subscribers/First Directors at the Time of Incorporation

Cos manufacturing similar products can’t be comparable if their turnover are not matched

IT/ILT : Company manufacturing same product as that of assessee but in very small portion of its total turnover, cannot be taken as a comparable for computation of ALP

Master Circular prescribing guidelines for record keeping requirements for insurance cos is modified

INSURANCE : AML/CFT Guidelines