Film director bends in copyright dispute, acknowledges due credit; SC appreciates "acceptance"
SC records settlement between script writer Jyoti Kapoor (appellant) and film director Kunal Kohli (respondent), in a copyright infringement dispute, whereby appellant contended use of her script in respondent's movie 'Phir se', thus, alleging breach of copyright; As per the settlement, respondent shall give reasonable prominence in the credits of the film to appellant and shall also pay Rs 25 lakhs; Pursuant to the settlement original suit in city civil court in Mumbai shall be withdrawn and other related suits shall be disposed off; SC directs that respondent's movie 'Phir se' could now be released "after following the due procedure as required in law"; Appreciating the settlement arrived at between the parties, SC remarks that such a step is appreciating "as in the field of art and creativity, a settlement conveys the concept of culture of acceptance and settlement in society":SC
The order was passed by Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Prafulla C. Pant.
LSI Note:
Jyoti Kapoor had approached Bombay High Court against Kunal Kohli on the ground of breach of confidence and copyright infringement and sought permanent injunction against release of Kohli's film 'Phir Se'. HC granted ad-interim injunction to Jyoti Kapoor and held there was breach of confidence by Kunal Kohli, as he used Kapoor's script of 'R.S.V.P.' film shared with him, which involved the concept of second marriage between two divorcees. [LSI-500-HC-2015-(BOM)].
Govt. defends clampdown on NGOs for FCRA violations; 10,000 registrations cancelled
Govt. lays out statistics on action taken against NGOs for violation of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) & Rules (FCRR) thereunder; Registration of over 10,000 associations cancelled in March 2015, after issue of Show Cause Notice, for non-filing of annual returns for three consecutive years; 15 cases referred to CBI, 10 to State Police for further investigation/prosecution, accounts of 23 associations frozen; Govt. action also based on inputs from Intelligence Bureau (IB) & taken by following due process of law, denies any attempt to muzzle NGOs/civil societies; Govt. to amend FCRR to simplify process of application/grant of registration, will also help in effective monitoring/expeditious reporting by banks of receipt of foreign contributions by persons not registered under FCRA: Reply of Minister of State for Home Affairs Mr. Kiren Rijiju in RS, to questions posed by MPs.
Click here to read more.
Govt. expands eBiz scope, includes 12-more central government services
Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of State (Independent Charge). Commerce & Industry states that besides applying to 14 services on eBiz portal, option also made available to apply through Composite Application Form for obtaining 'Company Incorporation' from MCA, PAN & TAN from CBDT, 'Employer Registration' from ESI & EPFO; States that Govt. has identified 12 more services for integration with eBiz portal; Additional services include FIPB approval (Dept. of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance), Annual Filing of co. returns (MCA), Constitution of partnership firm/ LLP (MCA), Environment Clearance, approval for diversion of forest land for non-forest (Ministry of Environment & Forest), issue of Import Export license (DGFT), Changes / correction in PAN data (CBDT), issue of custom duty concession certificate to entrepreneurs under project import scheme, Registration under Contract Labour Act, Building and other construction workers Act, Inter-State Migrant Workmen Act: PIB Release
Click here to read more.
Mystery of Confusing Notifications on applicability of Excise Duty on Textiles, Mobile phone, Note books, Spectacles, Calculators, Water filters, Sauces and ketchups, Bicycles, etc.
The Central Board of Excise and Customs ("the CBEC" or "the Board") has issued three Central Excise Notifications apparently to clarify when manufacturers can avail exemption or concessional rates of CE duty.
· Notification No.34/2015-Central Excise, Dated: July 17, 2015, amending Notification 30/2004-CE, which provides for an exemption for certain textile articles
· Notification No.35/2015-Central Excise, Dated: July 17, 2015, amending Notification 1/2011-CE, which prescribes an effective rate of 2% duty on certain goods
· Notification No.36/2015-Central Excise, Dated: July 17, 2015, amending Notification 12/2012-CE:
- Condition 16: Exemption for certain goods either wholly or partly – steel, Aluminium, Tablet Computer, Mobile handsets
- Condition 20 Clause (a): Exemption for certain goods – Copper
- Condition 25: Exemption for certain goods – fertilisers, goldsmith wares
- Condition 52A: Exemption for certain goods – bunker fuels, solar water heater
Objective of these amendments are that the Manufacturer seeking to claim Nil rate of duty or 2% duty or any other Concessional rate of duty under the amended notifications:
· Procure Inputs/capital goods which are used for manufacture of excisable goods, on which "appropriate duty has been paid", be it Central Excise duty or the Additional duty of Customs;
· Input services which are utilized for manufacture of excisable goods on which "appropriate service tax has been paid".
· Manufacturers claiming the exemption should not avail CENVAT credit of duty/tax paid on inputs, capital goods, input services.
Issues arise because of these amendments: Whether the Manufacturer cannot claim Nil rate of duty or 2% duty or any other Concessional rate of duty under the amended notifications if:
· Inputs/ capital goods is not liable to excise duty or where excise duty is nil, i.e. No excise duty is paid on Inputs/ capital goods which are used for manufacture of excisable goods.
· Input Services is not liable to service tax or where service tax is exempted.
Because of the said amendments, there is hue and cry among the diverse section of manufacturers, manufacturing – Readymade garments, Mobile phone, Note books, Spectacles, Calculators, Water filters, Sauces and ketchups, Bicycles, etc.
Mystery resolved by the Board:
Now, the Board has issued three Notifications No. 37/2015-CE, 38/2015-CE, 39/2015-CE, dated July 21, 2015, to correct the mystery created by the Notification Nos. 34/2015-CE, 35/2015-CE and 36/2015-CE dated July 17, 2015 and issued a Circular No. 1005/12/2015-CX dated July 21, 2015, clarifying apprehensions have been raised about the use of the phrase of "appropriate duty". In this regard, an Explanation has been inserted in the Notifications No. 30/2004-CE dated July 9, 2004, Notification No.1/2011-CE dated March 1, 2011 and Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated March 17, 2012 so as to clarify that the appropriate duty or appropriate additional duty or appropriate service tax for the purposes of the said notifications/entries includes NIL duty/ tax or Concessional duty/tax, whether or not read with any relevant exemption notification for the time being in force.
Hence, the domestically manufactured goods covered under these Notifications/Entries continue to be exempt from Excise duty or subject to Concessional rate of excise duty, as the case may be as they were prior to July 17, 2015.
Hope the information will assist you in your Professional endeavours. In case of any query/ information, please do not hesitate to write back to us.
Thanks & Best Regards.
Bimal Jain
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
41 promoters' 100% stake pledged ; Former SEBI chief Damodaran launches trust for non-exec. directors.
41 promoters' 100% stake pledged ; Former SEBI chief Damodaran launches trust for non-exec. directors.
Finds prima-facie force in Western Coalfield's bid-rigging allegation against sand & coal transporters
CCI directs Director General to investigate into a bid-rigging matter, filed by a miniratna co., Western Coalfield Ltd ('informant', subsidiary of Coal India) against 10 sand & coal transporters (opposite parties); Informant had issued tender notices for transportation of sand and coal in different parts of Maharashtra; On prima facie observation, notes the rates quoted by opposite parties in four tenders issued by informant, which were much above the average estimated costs; States that such identical rates "portray that the same could not have been the result of independent decision making"; Further observes that, "Although some of the Opposite Parties had quoted different rates, their rates were too close to the identical rates as quoted by others which could not be a mere coincidence":CCI
The ruling was delivered by Shri. Ashok Chawla (Chairperson), Shri. S. L. Bunker, Shri. Sudhir Mital, Shri. Augustine Peter, Shri. U. C. Nahta and Shri. M. S. Sahoo (Members).
Advocates Krishnayan Sen, Uddyam Mukherjee and Ankit Jain argued on behalf of the informant. Mr. Sunil Singh, Mr. Jasbir Singh Sani, Mr. Kanhaja Lal Khadelwal, Advocates Rishi Kapoor, Gitanjali Kapoor, Love Kumar and Mr. Jagdish Kumar Bashin appeared on behalf of the opposite parties.
Band for GST-rates
The Bill empowered GST Council to make recommendations for the rates of goods and service tax including floor rates with bands. The Committee recommended that the word 'band' may be defined in GST laws as following:
"Band": Range of GST rates over the floor rate within which Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) or State Goods and Service Tax (SGST) may be levied on any specified goods or services or any specified class of gods or services by the Central or a particular State Government as the case may be.
In its report, The Committee mentioned that it was aware that while discharging the functions conferred upon the GST Council, it would be guided by the need for a harmonized structure of goods and services tax and for the development of a harmonized national market for goods and services.
It can be said that while construing above definition of 'Band' one has to ensure that harmonized structure of GST-rates must not be altered.
Voting pattern
The Committee found no merit in altering the voting pattern proposed in the Bill.
Dispute Settlement Authority
It also didn't recommend inclusion of provision for GST Dispute Settlement Authority having noted that GST Council shall decide only the 'modalities' to resolve disputes.
Definition of 'Supply'
The Bill proposed definition of 'goods and services tax' to mean any tax on supply of goods, or services or both. The Committee opined that the term 'supply' would be defined in the various GST laws relating to CGST and SGST, therefore, it would not be appropriate to define the term 'supply' in the Bill.
Definition of 'services'
The Bill proposed to define 'services' to mean anything other than goods. The Committee felt that term 'services' had been so defined in order to give it wide amplitude so that all supplies that are not goods can broadly be covered within the ambit of services and no activity remains outside the taxable net. It also opined that this would also minimize disputes. In view of the above, it proposed no change in the definition.
Additional Goods and Services Tax
The Bill proposed to levy non-Cenvatable additional tax at 1% on inter-State supply of goods. The Committee felt that the provision of 1% additional tax in its present form was likely to lead to cascading effect of taxes. Therefore, it strongly recommended that following Explanation should be added for word 'supply':
Supply: "All forms of supply made for a consideration."
Compensation to States
The Bill proposed that the Parliament 'may' compensate States for loss of revenue for a period which may be extended to five years. The Committee felt that there was no justification for substitution of the word 'may' with 'shall'. It, however, recommended that compensation should be provided for whole period of five years.
(Source: Taxmann)
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment