Pending decisions on similar issues of earlier year will keep the same matter of next year in abeyan

IT: Where issue in respect of exemption to assessee under section 10(26AAB) for preceding year was pending in appeal before Tribunal, proceeding under section 143(2) for subsequent year should be kept in abeyance till disposal of said appeal

Breaking a transportation rule won’t hit the depreciation claim on vehicles

IT: If a vehicle is used in contravention of Rules provided by Transportation Department, it would not effect claim of depreciation under Income-tax Act

Tribunal exercises discretionary power to dismiss appeal involving sum less than Rs. 50,000

ST : Where amount involved in appeal filed by revenue by only Rs. 15,825 i.e., less than Rs. 50,000, appeal was dismissed exercising discretionary power

No predatory pricing was involved if petitioner offered to work at similar price as agreed upon with

Competition Act: Where informant sought for contract from ONGC on same rates at which it was given to opposite party, allegation of predatory pricing by informant against opposite party was without any substance

Gift received from mother's sister's son is taxable under section 56

IT : Mother's sister's son is not a relative as per section 56(2)(v) and gift received from him is taxable

Entities incurring losses in odd circumstances excluded from list of comparables for TP study

IT/ILT: Comparables selected for computing ALP should be functionally similar, and therefore, where assessee was a trading concern, manufacturing concern could not be selected

Definition of speculative transaction is for computing business income; it isn’t applicable to sec.

IT : Loss from derivative trades is speculative loss under section 73 as definition in section 43(5) is not applicable to section 73

Companies with dissimilar functions and losses to be excluded from list of comparables for TP study

IT/ILT : Functionally dissimilar companies and persistently loss-making companies cannot be taken as comparables for computing arm's length price solely on ground that they were taken as comparables for subsequent years, as comparability is tested independently and separately for each year

Matter remanded as adjudication order was passed without testing the evidences furnished by assessee

ST : Where adjudication order has been passed without testing evidence furnished by assessee or available with him, matter was remanded back for consideration of such evidence and passing of fresh order

Customs Notification No 72/2013 (NT) dated 12-07-2013

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

(Department of Revenue)

Notification No. 72/ 2013-Customs (N.T.)

New Delhi, dated the 12^th July, 2013

S.O. (E). – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 and sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise and Customs hereby appoints the Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner of Customs, Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, Nhava Sheva to act as a common adjudicating authority to exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed on-

1. The Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner of Customs, Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, Nhava Sheva;
   


2. The Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner of Custom (Import), Custom House, Mundra,

for the purpose of adjudicating the matters relating to show cause notice pertaining to M/s Aries Agro Ltd., Mumbai-400043 issued vide, F. No.DRI/AZU/INV-32/2011 dated the 20^th February, 2013, by the Joint Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad.

[F.No. 437/19/2013-Cus.IV]

(M.V. Vasudevan)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

Customs Notification No 73/2013 (NT) dated 12-07-2013

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

(Department of Revenue)

Notification No. 73/2013-Customs (N.T.)

New Delhi, dated the 12^th July, 2013

S.O. (E). – In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 and sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise and Customs hereby appoints the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Exports), Nhava Sheva to act as a common adjudicating authority to exercise the powers and discharge the duties conferred or imposed on-

1. The Additional Commissioner of Customs (Exports), Nhava Sheva ; Mumbai
   


2. The Additional Commissioner of Customs, Kandla and
   


3. The Additional Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Tuglakabad, Delhi,

for the purpose of adjudicating the matters relating to show cause notice pertaining to M/s Sandesh Exports Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Namo Impex Pvt. Ltd. and others issued vide, F. No. DRI/MZU/G/Inv-24/2010-2011 dated the 8^th March, 2013, by the Additional Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai Zonal Unit, Mumbai.-400020

[F. No. 437/28/2013-Cus.IV]

(M.V. Vasudevan)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

HC confirms protective assessment as there was doubt about the real owner of income

IT : In case of doubt or ambiguity about real entity in whose hands a particular income is to be assessed, Assessing Authority is entitled to have recourse to make a protective assessment

RBI grants permission to banks to acquire shares of SWIFT as per latter’s guidelines and bye laws

FEMA/ILT : Overseas Investments - Shares of Swift

Customs Notification No 74/2013 (NT) dated 12-07-2013

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

(Department of Revenue)

Notification No.74/2013-Customs (N.T.)

New Delhi, dated the 12^th July, 2013

G.S.R.----- (E). - In exercise of the powers conferred by section 157 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Excise and Customs hereby makes the following regulations further to amend the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998, namely :-

(1) These regulations may be called the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Amendment Regulations, 2013.

(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998, in regulation 2, in sub-regulation (2), in clause (a), for the words “Calicut” the words “Calicut, Trichirappalli " shall be substituted.

[F. No. 450/54/2012-Cus.IV]

(M.V.Vasudevan)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

Foot note: The principal Notification No.87/98-Customs (N.T.), dated the 9^th November, 1998 was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary vide number G.S.R. 662(E), dated the 9^th November, 1998 and was last amended vide Notification No.84/2011-Customs (N.T.), dated the 29^th November, 2011 , published in the Gazette of India vide number G.S.R 847(E), dated the 29^th November, 2011.

CUSTOMS INSTRUCTION dated 12-07-2013

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

Department of Revenue

Central Board of Excise and Customs

Tariff Unit

INSTRUCTION

229A, North Block, New Delhi,

12^th July, 2013

To

All Chief Commissioners of Customs/Customs (Prev.),

All Commissioners of Customs/Customs (Prev.),

All Chief Commissioners Customs & Central Excise,

All Commissioners of Customs & Central Excise,

All Directors General under CBEC.

Sir / Madam,

Subject: Clarification regarding applicability of the Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automotive Vehicles (Quality Control) Order 2009 for used tyres –regarding.

Reference has been received regarding applicability of the Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automotive Vehicles (Quality Control) Order 2009 in case of old and used pneumatic tyres and tubes for automotive vehicles, requirement of consent from the Ministry of Environment and Forest, and the date of applicability of the said Quality Order for imported goods.

2. This issue was examined by Board in consultation with the Department of Industry & Policy & Promotion (DIPP), and Directorate General of Foreign Trade, Ministry of Commerce & Industry. The Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automotive Vehicles (Quality Control) Order 2009, is applicable to newly manufactured tyres and tubes and old and used tyres are not covered under this order. With the implementation of the Quality (Control) Order, 2009 for Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automotive Vehicles with effect from 13.05.2011, no such tyres can be imported in the country without BIS marking (except certain exemptions provided in the Order).


3. Doubts have also been raised whether the order of the honourable Delhi High Court in a matter pertaining to Automobile Tyre Manufacturers Association (ATMA) versus Union of India and others (W.P. (C) 4098/2011 dated 06.07.2011) regarding no-BIS marked tyres manufactured prior to 13.05.2011 will apply to imports or not. It is clarified that the observations made by honourable Delhi High Court in its Order dated 06.07.2011 in W.P. (C) 4098/2011 dated 06.07.2011 would be applicable only to domestic manufacturers and tyre dealers in respect of such stock of tyres manufactured prior to 13.05.2011, and not to imports of tyres.


4. As per Foreign Trade Policy, retreaded or used Pneumatic Tyres under ITC (HS) codes 40121100, 40121200, 40121300, 40121910, 40121990, 40122010, 40122020 is “Restricted”. These imports are subject to Policy Condition 1 of Chapter 40 of ITC (HS), 2012 Schedule I (Imports). However, import of used rubber tyres with one cut bead wire is free under TIC (HS) code 40040000.


5. In view of the aforesaid, it is clarified that imports of retreaded or used tyres are allowed subject to compliance of the provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy, and the requirement of consent / permission from the Ministry of Environment and Forest as stipulated in the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules 2008.


6. Suitable instructions in the matter may be issued to field formations for strict compliance and pending cases if any, may be decided accordingly.

Yours faithfully,

(Subodh Singh)

OSD (Customs), Tariff Unit,

Fax-011-23092173

Internal Circulation: As usual.
F.No. 528/109/2011-STO (TU)

No wealth tax on buildings permitted by Bombay Development Authority for commercial usage

WT: Where Bombay Metropolitan Region Development Authority (BMRDA) had permitted a particular building to be used for purpose of shop, bank, showrooms etc., property owned by assessee in said building being a commercial property was not chargeable to tax under section 2(ea)(i)(5)

Writing off a debt is enough to claim deductions; assessee isn’t required to establish its irrecover

IT: For an assessee to claim deduction in relation to bad debts it is now no longer necessary for assessee to establish that debt had become irrecoverable; and it is sufficient if assessee forms such an opinion and writes off debt as irrecoverable in its accounts

Predecessor may claim credit on input services used for taxable transaction of successor

ST/ECJ : Transferor is entitled to take account of taxable transactions of its successor so as to be entitled to deduct tax paid on inputs/input services which had been procured for purposes of successor's taxable operations

RBI/2013-14/134 A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 11 dated 11-07-2013

Reserve bank of India

A.P.(DIR Series) Circular No. 11

July 11, 2013

To

All Category - I Authorised Dealer Banks

Madam / Sir,

External Commercial Borrowings (ECB) Policy – Review of all-in-cost ceiling

Attention of Authorized Dealer Category-I (AD Category-I) banks is invited to A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 99 dated March 30, 2012 and A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 60 dated December 14, 2012 relating to ECB.

1. On a review, it has been decided that the all-in-cost ceiling as specified in A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 99 dated March 30, 2012 will continue to be applicable till September 30, 2013 and is subject to review thereafter.


2. All other aspects of ECB policy remain unchanged and AD Category-I banks may bring the contents of this circular to the notice of their constituents and customers concerned.


3. The directions contained in this circular have been issued under sections 10(4) and 11(1) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999) and are without prejudice to permissions / approvals, if any, required under any other law.

Yours faithfully,

(Rudra Narayan Kar)

Chief General Manager-in Charge

RBI/2013-14/134

Failure to check one aspect during original assessment would bar AO from taking route of re-assessme

IT: Where during original assessment assessee's claim was processed at length and after calling for detailed explanation same was accepted, merely because a certain element or angle was not in mind of Assessing Officer while accepting such a claim, could not be a ground for issuing notice under section 148 for reassessment