In sunbeam Auto case Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that though revision can be made in a case when there is lack of enquiry in the order, however, inadequate inquiries cannot be a basis of revision as it depends on the perception of the officer exercising assessment powers. A mere deference is perception of CIT and AO cannot make the order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest or revenue.
PFA
A mere diference is perception of CIT & AO cannot make the order erroneous & prejudicial to the interest or revenue
Smt. N.K. Vinayak vs Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Delhi), I.T.A.No.2454/Del/2012, Date of Pronouncement -28.3.2014
We have heard the rival contentions, material available on the record and case laws cited by both the parties. From the facts narrated above and the paper books filed it emerges that during the course of assessment proceeding questions, enquiries and explanation on the relevant issues were called for by the ld AO and were replied by the assessee. Thus these are not the assessments where there was no enquiry on the relevant aspect. The questionnaires, order sheet entries, assessees submissions and explanations make it quite clear. Thus we are unable to hold that assessment orders suffer from lack of enquiries. In sunbeam Auto case Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that though revision can be made in a case when there is lack of enquiry in the order, however, inadequate inquiries cannot be a basis of revision as it depends on the perception of the officer exercising assessment powers. A mere deference is perception of CIT and AO cannot make the order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest or revenue. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the recent judgment in the case of DLF Ltd. squarely held that:
"It is not mere prejudice to the revenue, or a mere erroneous view which can be revised under section 263. There should be the added element of 'unsustainability' in the order of the Assessing Officer, which clothes the Commissioner with jurisdiction to issue notice and proceed to make appropriate orders. [Para 10]"
Looking at the entirety of facts, it cannot be held that the impugned assessment orders suffer from unsustainability also.
Since reasonable enquiries were made, assesssee was called on to file their explanation and submissions on relevant issue and besides the assessment orders are sustainable, it cannot be held that these are cases of any manifest inadequate inquiry or impossible view or unsustainability.
We also find merit in the argument of ld. counsel that CIT must in demonstrative terms establish as to what prejudice is caused to the revenue. In these cases instead of establishing this mandatory condition ld. CIT has merely chosen to set aside the assessments back to AO to conduct further enquiries. ITAT judgment in the case of – S.S.I. Ltd (supra) supports the view of the assessee.
In view of the entirety of facts, circumstances, arguments and case laws mentioned above we are of the view that the exercise of jurisdiction u/s 263 by ld. CIT in setting aside the impugned assessments passed u/s 153A r/w sec 143(3) in the case of both the assessee is bad in law, his orders are quashed.
Ajay Modi "GST BILL" -THE CONSTITUTION (122ND Amendment Bill),2014 19.12.2014 Pre condition for GST implementation Constitution amendment Bill is required to be passed with two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament Bill will have to be ratified by at least half of India's states Centre Govt. own GST Bill and model GST Bill States will […]
PPT PFA
CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 7/2007 DATED 23-10-2007 Procedure for refund of tax deducted at source under section 195 to the person deducting the tax – section 239 of the Income Tax 1961 – Refunds The Board had issued Circular No. 790 dated 20th April, 2000, laying down the procedure for refund of tax deducted under section […]
PFA
Many theories have come into effect relating to the reasons of fall in prices, disadvantage for Oil producers, adverse effects on economies etc. But, can you imagine that it may be Advantageous for Some. Just think once, In my Opinion it is little bit Advantageous to OPEC nations & Other Oil exporting countries whose primary revenue is from Export of crude oil. It must be sounding a little bit foolish but take a look on this view too.
Falling Crude Prices – Hidden advantage to OPEC
Abstract
Its first time after the 2008 crisis when the Crude oil Price has declined so much. Crude oil prices have declined to $47 per barrel in the past Quarter making it difficult for the producers to continue same level of production.
Many theories have come into effect relating to the reasons of fall in prices, disadvantage for Oil producers, adverse effects on economies etc.
But, can you imagine that it may be Advantageous for Some. Just think once, In my Opinion it is little bit Advantageous to OPEC nations & Other Oil exporting countries whose primary revenue is from Export of crude oil. It must be sounding a little bit foolish but take a look on this view too.
In general people must be thinking that it must be horrific time for oil exporting countries since there revenue must have fallen, its true, but, there are always two sides of a coin.
Shale oil Revolution
We are all familiar with the shale oil revolution in United States (US) which has led to a fall in demand of Crude oil. US, which was a leading oil consumer has now become self sufficient in oil production and would had join the race of exporting oil but, the fall in crude oil prices have shattered the dreams of self sufficiency, since the Current Rate of oil couldn't fetch the US shale oil drillers their cost.
Cost of Production of Shale Drillers
Shale oil is costly to haul out and only viable at high-enough prices, Ed Morse, Citigroup Inc.'s head of global commodities research in New York, said by phone Sept. 23. Extracting oil from shale formations costs $50 to $100 a barrel to produce, compared with $10 to $25 a barrel for conventional supplies from the Middle East and North Africa, the Paris-based International Energy Agency estimates.
(http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-07/shale-boom-tested-as-sub-90-oil-threatens-u-s-drillers.html#)
Thus, making it impossible for shale drillers to continue their production
Cost of production to Crude oil
| Lifting Costs | Finding Costs | Total Upstream Costs | |
| United States – Average | $12.18 | $21.58 | $33.76 |
| On-shore | $12.73 | $18.65 | $31.38 |
| Off-shore | $10.09 | $41.51 | $51.60 |
| All Other Countries – Average | $9.95 | $15.13 | $25.08 |
| Canada | $12.69 | $12.07 | $24.76 |
| Africa | $10.31 | $35.01 | $45.32 |
| Middle East | $9.89 | $6.99 | $16.88 |
| Central & South America | $6.21 | $20.43 | $26.64 |
Source: – http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=367&t=6
It's quite obvious from the above comparisons that at the current price level US shale oil drillers couldn't continue to compete. This was also seen in the decision of OPEC members not to cut supply, this decision sent oil prices plunging..Although the decision was to sustain their market share but unknowingly it became a back breaker for Shale drillers.
Current scenario must be very chaotic but, it will only lead to future benefit for Crude exporters.
(Written by- Arindam Shukla, Arindam.shukla@gmail.com - Currently working with RPMD & Associates)
Bonus shares are additional shares given to the current shareholders without any additional cost, based upon the number of shares that a shareholder owns. These are company's accumulated earnings which are not given out in the form of dividends, but are converted into free shares.
PFA
CBEC directs custom officers to follow FEMA guidelines related Export & Import of Currency
Circular No. 03/2015-Customs
Dated 16.01.2015
Subject : Export and Import of Currency –reg.
Attention is invited to Regulation (3) of Foreign Exchange Management (Export and Import of Currency) (Amendment) Regulations, 2009, notified vide Notification No.FEMA.258/2013-RB dated February 15, 2013 and A.P. (DIR Series) Circular No. No. 39 dated September 6, 2013 in terms of which, any person resident in India may take outside India or having gone out of India on a temporary visit, may bring into India (other than to and from Nepal and Bhutan) currency notes of Government of India and Reserve Bank of India notes up to an amount not exceeding ₹ 10,000.
2. The RBI vide A.P. (DIR series) No. 146, dated 19.06.2014 has now provided that aforementioned limit has been enhanced to ₹ 25000/- per person from ₹ 10,000/- per person. Thus, any person resident in India:
i) may take outside India (other than to Nepal and Bhutan) currency notes of Government of India and Reserve Bank of India notes up to an amount not exceeding ₹ 25,000 (Rupees twenty five thousand only); and
ii) who had gone out of India on a temporary visit, may bring into India at the time of his return from any place outside India (other than from Nepal and Bhutan), currency notes of Government of India and Reserve Bank of India notes up to an amount not exceeding ₹ 25,000 (Rupees twenty five thousand only).
3. Further, vide said A.P. (DIR series) No. 146 dated 19.06.2014, it is also provided that any person resident outside India, not being a citizen of Pakistan and Bangladesh and also not a traveller coming from and going to Pakistan and Bangladesh, and visiting India:
i) may take outside India currency notes of Government of India and Reserve Bank of India notes up to an amount not exceeding ₹ 25,000 (Rupees twenty five thousand only) while exiting only through an airport.
ii) may bring into India currency notes of Government of India and Reserve Bank of India notes up to an amount not exceeding ₹ 25,000 (Rupees twenty five thousand only) while entering only through an airport.
4. In the light of the amended guidelines of RBI on the subject matter, all Chief Commissioners of Customs/ Customs and Central Excise are requested to ensure that the aforementioned guidelines are scrupulously followed by the officers under their charge. Further, it may be ensured without fail that wide publicity is given to these guidelines by displaying them at prominent places at the airports etc. so that no harassment is caused to the genuine passengers. Officers may also be suitably sensitized in the matter. Any non compliance on the part of the officers will be viewed seriously.
5. Difficulty faced, if any, may be brought to the notice of the Board.
F. No 520/23/2013- Cus. VI
Yours faithfully,
(R.P.Singh)
Director (Customs) (Source- CBEC)
'GSM mobile handsets' with duplicate IMEI or fake IMEI & 'CDMA mobile handsets' with duplicate ESN/MEID or fake ESN/MEID are added to the list of 'Prohibited' items for import.
Mobile with fake Duplicate IMEI/ESN/MEID added to list of 'Prohibited' items for import
NOTIFICATION NO. 107/(RE-2013)/2009-2014,
Dated: January 16, 2015
Subject: Amendment in import policy conditions under ITC (HS) 4 digit code 8517.
S.O. (E) - In exercise of powers conferred by Section 3 of FT (D&R) Act, 1992, read with paragraph 1.3 and 2.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014, the Central Government hereby amends the Import Policy Condition under ITC (HS) 4 digit code 8517 of Chapter 85 of ITC (HS), 2012 – Schedule – 1 (Import Policy):
I. Import of 'GSM mobile handsets' (classified under ITC (HS) code '8517') without International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) No., with all zeroes IMEI, duplicate IMEI or fake IMEI is 'Prohibited'.
II mport of 'CDMA mobile handsets' (classified under ITC (HS) code '8517') without Electronic Serial Number (ESN)/Mobile Equipment Identifier (MEID), with all Zeroes as ESN/MEID, duplicate ESN/MEID or fake ESN/MEID is 'Prohibited'.
2. Effect of this Notification: 'GSM mobile handsets' with duplicate IMEI or fake IMEI & 'CDMA mobile handsets' with duplicate ESN/MEID or fake ESN/MEID are added to the list of 'Prohibited' items for import.
(Pravir Kumar)
Director General of Foreign Trade
[Issued from F.No.01/89/180/Misc-9/AM-05/PC-2 (A)]
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment