Thursday, 31 October 2013

HAPPY NEWS AND HAPPY DIWALI!

Dear Members,

As expected the last date for filing Form WW Audit Report has been extended till 31.12.2013 vide GO.Ms.136 dated 31.12.2013.

Really it is a happy news to enjoy Diwali happpily.

HAPPY DIWALI!

-A.KRISHNAMOORTHY
Secretary

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

Same activity cannot be considered as manufacturing and service at a time - Sent by S.Ramakrishnan

We are sharing with you an important judgement of the Hon’ble CESTAT, New Delhi, in the case of Jubilant Industries Limited Versus CCE, Ghaziabad[2013 (9) TMI 358 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] on following issue:
Issue:
Whether the same activity can be considered as manufacturing and subjected to excise duty and at the same time considered to be aservice and subjected to service tax?
Facts & Background:
Jubilant Industries Limited (“the Appellant”) is successor in interest of a company by name Pace Marketing Specialties Ltd. (“PMSL”). The Appellant entered into an agreement with Jubilant Life Sciences Ltd. (“JLSL”) under which they agreed to manufacture excisable goods from raw materials to be supplied by JLSL. The terms of the agreement entered into between JLSL and the Appellant clearly show that the Appellant was processing goods for JLSL and the manufacturing activity was entirety carried out by the Appellant in the presence of the managerial staff of JLSL. All the materials required for carrying out the processing activity were supplied by JLSL. The products once processed were either supplied to JLSL’s depot or directly to the customers of JLSL on payment of excise duty.
As a consideration for carrying out the aforesaid activities, the Appellant recovered processing charges from JLSL which had a fixed and a variable component. Since their entire factory was to be used for manufacturing activity and JLSL was willing to clear the goods on payment of excise dutyfrom the Appellant’s factory, the Appellant consulted the Excise Department as to who should be registered for discharging excise duty liability. With the advice and consent of the Department officials, the Excise registration in the name of the Appellant was surrendered and new registrationtaken in the name of JLSL and they were paying excise duty on goods manufactured and cleared from the Appellant’s factory.
Revenue was of the view that the Appellant was providing “Business Support Services” as defined under 65(104c) of the Finance Act, 1994 (“the Finance Act”) made taxable under Section 65(105)(zzzq) of the Finance Act. Accordingly two Show Cause Notices (“SCN”) were issued – SCN dated October 28,-2010 related to the period April 2007 to March 2010 and SCN dated March 18, 2011 related to April 2010 to 14-11-2011 demanding service tax amounting to Rs. 1,31,93,416/- on account of first SCN and Rs. 29,02,873/- on account of second SCN, which were confirmed by the Department along with interest and penalties.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid Order, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT, New Delhi.
Held:
It was held by the Hon’ble CESTAT that the same activity cannot be considered as manufacturing and subjected to excise duty and at the same time considered to be a service and subjected to service tax. This principle is also recognized under “Business Auxiliary Services” defined under Section 65(19) and excluded from the scope of service tax levy and therefore, Process amounting to manufacture is kept specifically out of the scope of service tax. Thus, in the instant case manufacturing activities undertaken by the Appellant are not exigible to service tax even under “Business Support Service” instead chargeable to excise duty.
The Hon’ble CESTAT held that as per the contract, JLSL was supplying all the raw materialsrequired for manufacturing final products, supervising the manufacturing process and was taking steps to ensure the quality of the products. All activities like handling the raw materials, its accounting and processing were done by the Appellant. This means that both the parties were involved in the manufacturing activity. In such situation legal provisions exist in Central Excise laws for considering either of the two parties as manufacturer. In most cases, the person doing the job-work claims to be the manufacturer and pays excise duty as applicable in his hands. There are situations where the person supplying raw materials undertakes to pay excise duty and for that reason excise duty is not charged in the hands of the person doing the manufacturing activity videNotification 214/86-C.E. (“the Notification”) is applicable in such cases.
However, the Notification only provides a mechanism by which the duty liability is fixed on the person supplying raw material (JLSL in this case) and enables the clearance of the goods from the factory of actual manufacturer subject to undertaking for payment of duty by the other party or its further use in the manufacture of excisable goods. In a situation, where the other party (JLSL in this case) was willing to pay excise duty at the time of clearance of the goods from the factory ofmanufacture, there was no need to adopt the procedure laid down in the Notification. Therefore, the fact that JLSL was paying excise duty does not lead to a legal position that the Appellant was not doing manufacturing activity.
Furthermore, the Hon’ble CESTAT held that the Appellant was charging two components towards job-charges separated as fixed cost and variable cost cannot alter this situation so long as goods were manufactured. However, in a situation where goods were not manufactured but charges were collected under the fixed component, it could have been considered as a service.
Therefore, on the basis of the above judgment, the Hon’ble CESTAT allowed the appeal in favour of the Appellant.
Important to Note:
Post Negative list regime effective from  July 1, 2012, “any process amounting to manufacture or production of goods” is also falling under one of the Negative list of Services under Section 66D(f) of the Finance Act.
Further, “process amounting to manufacture or production of goods” means a process on which duties of excise are leviable under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955 or any process amounting to manufacture of alcoholic liquors for human consumption, opium, Indian hemp and other narcotic drugs and narcotics on which duties of excise are leviable under any State Act for the time being in force.
————————-
Bimal Jain
FCA, FCS, LLB, B.Com (Hons)
Mobile: +91 9810604563
(Viewing Members May Post Comment so that it is viewed  by you - Thanks - Secretary)

Online issue of C and F Forms


நம்ம tnvat.gov.in ல் சுட்டது 
  
With reference to Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Circular No.CC4/678/2012 dated 25/09/2013, for the period from January 2013 returns to August 2013 returns, manual forms can be obtained from the Assessment Circles after getting approval from Joint Commissioners. From September 2013 returns, issue of manual forms will be dispensed with. Further, the dealers will be permitted to cancel the C and F forms beyond the stipulated period of six months after getting the due verification and approval of the Assessing Officers.

CONSEQUENCES OF LATE PAYMENT AND NON PAYMENT OF IT TDS - SHARED BY S.RAMAKRISHNAN

In Recent past we noticed that department has taken late payment of TDS very seriously and in addition to imposing Interest and Penalty for LatePayment, they also start initiating Criminal Prosecution against those responsible for Deduction and Paymentof TDS. Recently and MD of aHyderabad based company been jailed for TDS payment defaults –  Company’s MD Sentenced 3 months rigorous imprisonment for TDS default.  We are discussing here the consequences of Non Payment or Late Payment of TDS.
Interest, Penalty & Prosecution for Failure to Deposit Tax Deducted:
1. If a person fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax at source, or, after deducting, fails to pay the whole  or any part of the tax to the credit of the  Central Government  within the prescribed time, he shall be  liable  to action in accordance with the provisions of section 201 and shall be deemed to be an assessee-in-default in respect of such tax and liable for  penal action u/s 221 ofthe Act. Further Section 201(1A)  lays down that such person  shall  be liable to pay simple interest
(i) at 1% for every month or part of the month on the amount of such tax from the date on  which such tax was deductible to the date  on which such tax is deducted; and
(ii) at one and one-half percent for every month or part of a month on the amount of such tax from the date on which such tax was deducted to the date on which such tax isactually paid.
Such interest, if chargeable is mandatory in nature and has to be paid before furnishing of quarterly statement of TDS for respective quarter.
2.  Section 271C inter alia lays down that if  any person  fails  to  deduct whole or any part of tax at source or fails to pay the whole or part of tax under second proviso to section 194B, he  shall  be  liable to pay, by way of  penalty, a sum equal to the amount  of tax  not  deducted or paid by him.
3.  Further, section  276B  lays  down that  if  a person fails to pay to the credit  of  the Central  Government  within  the prescribed  time, as above, the  tax  deducted at  source  by him, he shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment  for a term which shall be between 3 months and 7 years, along with fine.

Wednesday, 16 October 2013

Note shared on 15.10.2013 by  
Subramaniam Ramakrishnan    



 
Advocate C. P. Chugh
Is it not a good tool to avoid scrutiny.
1. Pay your taxes, advance tax and self assessment if any on due dates. You are not liable for any interest later on.
2. Submit your return on 31st March to avoid penalty u/s 271F
3  Do not send ITR-V till 30th Sep
4  Post ITR-V after 30th Sep
Your case could never be selected for Scrutiny under CASS because date of furnishing of return is date of furnishing it electronically succeeded by acceptance of ITR-V later-on (within  the specified or extended specified period).
Notice for scrutiny can be issued only within six month from the end of  the end of the year in whichthe return is filed and any notice issued beyond that date is illegal and time barred.
Is it not the Irony of our LAW and the LAW MAKERS.
 
Regards
S.RAMAKRISHNAN
AUDITOR
3-A T.V.K.NAGAR EXTN., I STREET, 
OPP.TO MUNICIPAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, COLLEGE ROAD, TIRUPUR - 641 602
PH:0421-2235423 Mob:9442005059 
save water

Friday, 11 October 2013

VAT AUDIT CIRCULAR

CIRCULAR No. 6/2013-2014                                                                 10.10.2013

STUDY CIRCLE MEETING

  Date                                    :     16/10/2013 - WEDNESDAY
    
              Venue                                  :     Vidya Mandir Matriculation School
      
             Time                                     :     5.00 pm
     
              Subject                                :     Form-WW - VAT Audit - Practical Discussion
         
              By                                        :     CA R.Anbazhagan, M.Com., FCA, Tirupur 
          
                                         You are requested to attend without fail.


                                                                                                                         Secretary.



Note:

The crucial last date for filing Form WW Audit Report is fast approaching. It is a very important meeting.   Attend and share your practical difficulties.

Members may send their views in advance to our association’s email: tpatirupur@gmail.com

Members may visit our blog: tpatirupur.blogspot.com. 
 ================================================================