<DIRECT TAX LAWS>

n Search and seizure - Where order passed under section 132B showed that certain amount withdrawn from assessee's bank account, which had been seized, was retained for estimated liability pending completion of assessment, there was no challenge to order passed under section 132B and assessment was yet to be completed, no relief to assessee against retention of amount could be granted - KCC Software v. DIT [CIVIL APPEAL NO. 769 OF 2008]

n  Income Chargeable as - Income that is received or deemed to be received in previous year is exigible to tax and obligation to use income in a particular manner does not remove it from category of income ; there is absolutely nothing in Act to permit assessee to treat part of income as deferred income and to offer it for taxation as per its own sweet will - Sterling Holiday Resorts (India) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [IT APPEAL NO. 335 (MDS) OF 2005]

n Charitable trust - An assessee can give notice in writing in Form No. 10 for more than one year in order to claim accumulation of income under section 11(2), and claim of assessee cannot be denied merely on ground that in subsequent year or years no further notice is given by assessee - Cotton Textiles Export Promotion Council v. Income-tax Officer [IT Appeal Nos. 6456 & 6576 (Mum.) of 2004]

n Interpretation of - Sections 36(1)(iv), 36 (1)(va) and 43b - Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Viraj Forgings Ltd. [IT Appeal Nos. 2988 to 2995 (Mum.) of 2006]

<FEMA>

n  Exim Bank's Line of Credit (LOC) of USD 122 million to the Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia - A. P. (DIR Series) Circular No. 29, dated 22-2-2008

n  Master Circular on Non-Resident Ordinary Rupee (NRO) Account - Master Circular No. 3 /2007- 08, dated 21-2-2008

n  Master Circular on Remittance Facilities for Non-Resident Indians/Persons of Indian Origin / Foreign Nationals - Master Circular No. 4 /2007- 08, dated 21-2-2008

n  Master Circular on Miscellaneous Remittances from India - Facilities for Residents - Master Circular No. 5 /2007- 08, dated 21-2-2008

<SERVICE TAX>

n  Business auxiliary service - Activity of assessee Custom House Agent in rendering services of arranging shipment of export cargo and negotiating same with shipping lines on behalf of clients would not fall under definition of Business auxiliary services;  more specific category for coverage of such type of activities will be steamer agent’s service - Bhuvaneswari Agencies (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - [2008] 12 STT 427 (BANG-CESTAT) [in Appeal No. ST/328/2006]

n  Business support services - Where assessee was appointed by bank to verify correctness, fairness and authenticity of informations furnished by those seeking bank loans, verification of details given by loan seekers could not be treated as promoting bank's business and, hence, could not be treated as 'Business auxiliary service', rendered by assessee would be covered under category of 'Business support service' - S.R. Kalyanakrishnan v. Commissioner of Central Excise - [2008] 12 STT 454 (BANG-CESTAT) [Appeal No. ST/125 of 2006]

n  Cargo handling service - Cargo in commercial parlance has a definite connotation, which is carried as freight in a ship, plane, rail or truck; activity of mere mechanical transfer of coal from coal face to tippers and, subsequent, transportation of coal within mining area, does not come under purview of cargo handling service - Sainik Mining & Allied Services Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - [2008] 12 STT 433 (KOL-CESTAT) [ST APPEAL NOs. 25 & 29 OF 2006]

n  Port service - Where assessee-port trust had its railway yard and sidings and railways collected from users of yards charges on behalf of assessee and remitted same to assessee, since railway siding charges collected for use of infrastructure put up by assessee were not in relation to vessels or goods and assessee also did not collect these charges from users, these charges did not represent money received by assessee for port service rendered by it; therefore, demand of service tax from assessee-port trust in respect of railway siding charges was not in accordance with law - New Mangalore Port Trust v. Commissioner of Service Tax - [2008] 12 STT 450 (BANG-CESTAT) [in Appeal no. st/120 of 2006]

<DAILY CASE LAW REPORTER>

n Ahmedabad ITAT on section 244A of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. [IT APPEAL NO. 1666 (AHD.) OF 2006]

n Cochin ITAT on section 271A of Income-tax Act, 1961 - C.H. Aboobacker Haji  v. Income-tax Officer [It appeal No. 293 (Coch.) of 2006] 

n Punjab and Haryana High Court on section 147 of Income tax Act, 1961 - Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt. Paramjit Kaur [INCOME-TAX REFERENCE NO. 18 OF 1998]

n Cochin ITAT on sections 45, 56 and 143 of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Mrs. Catherine Thomas v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [IT Appeal Nos. 325, 326 and 328 to 330 (Coch.) of 2005] 

n Rajkot ITAT on section 11 of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Rajkot Visha Shrimali Jain Samaj v. Income-tax officer [IT APPEAL NO. 158 (RTJ) of 2006] 

n Punjab and Haryana High Court on section 4 of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rohtas [INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 389 OF 2005] 

n Mumbai ITAT on section 194C of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income-tax Officer v. Shringar Cinemas (P.) Ltd. [IT Appeal Nos. 1932, 1933, 1935 and 1936 (Mum) of 2006]

n Mumbai SAT on section 15T of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 - Ramniranjan Kedia Tourism Services (P.) Ltd. v. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd. [APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2006]

n Mumbai SAT on section 15HB of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 - Ritedeal Trading Co. (P) Ltd. v. SEBI [APPEAL NO. 158 OF 2007]

n New Delhi CESTAT on section 86 of Finance Act, 1994 - Apex Colour Lab v. Commissioner of Central Excise [IN APPEAL NOS. 64, 67, 68, 81 AND 87 OF 2007-SM(BR)]

n New Delhi CESTAT on section 76 of Finance Act, 1994 - Baba Motors v. Commissioner of Central Excise [SERVICE TAX APPEAL NO. 178 OF 2007]

n Bangalore CESTAT on section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 - Bax Global India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax [SERVICE TAX APPEAL NO. 233 OF 2006]

n Mumbai CESTAT on rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Commissioner of Central Excise v. Bajaj Auto Ltd. [Appeal No. E/1835/06]

n Bangalore CESTAT on section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 - Commissioner of Central Excise v. Cardamom Mkg. Corpn. [SERVICE TAX APPEAL NOS. 94 and 76 OF 2006]

n Bangalore CESTAT on section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 - Commissioner of Central Excise v. Wintac Ltd. [APPEAL NO. ST/79 OF 2005]

n Chennai CESTAT on section 86 of Finance Act, 1994 - Dream Loanz v. Commissioner of Central Excise [APPLICATION NO. S/PD/44/20/07/IN APPEAL NO. S/59/07/MAS]

<NEWS>

n  Chidambaram to present his 7th Budget on Feb 29

n  Indian students may get income tax relief in US

n  No FBT on ESOPs please: India Inc tells FM

n  No capital gains on transfer of 'exchangeable bonds' outside India

n  Securities Appellate Tribunal upholds Sebi penalty on HSBC Securities

<A PREVIEW OF LATEST ISSUES OF TAXMANN'S JOURNALS>