Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Forum Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database More...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

GTC INDUSTRIES LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

Recovery u/s 11D of amount collected by the assessee in the name of duty of excise - retrospective effect - Cigarettes - Whether Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986 is a notification granting Set Off of the duty paid on the input viz., cut tobacco while paying duty on the finished product i.e. Cigarettes or is a notification granting exemption, simplicitor from payment of excise duty to Cigarettes? - Held that: - exemption Notification is required to be construed strictly and having regar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

off of excise on the duty already paid on Cut Tobaco as sought to be contended on behalf of the assessee - decided in favor of Revenue. - Whether the Board Circulars dated 06/07/1990 and 01/04/1981 and the Trade Notice dated 08/08/1986 did not establish that N/N.355/86 in effect conferred benefit on the manufacturer in the nature of Set Off and the same was not in the nature of an exemption notification simplicitor? - Held that: - the said Circular and the Trade Notices are clarificatory in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vor of Revenue. - Whether by virtue of the operation of Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986, the appellants had in fact paid the full effective duty on the final products and hence were within their rights to recover the full duty from their customers? - Held that: - As per exemption N/N.355/86-CE excise duty liability would be ₹ 80/- only. In the present case though the assessee paid the excise duty at ₹ 80/- (after debiting ₹ 20/- paid on input, namely, Cut Tobaco) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the duty collected from the buyer of the finished products was not more than the duty already paid on the input and the duty paid on the finished product at the time of removal cumulatively? - SCN - period of limitation - Held that: - the show cause notice came to be issued in the year 2000 for the alleged transactions for the period between 1993 to 1995, and therefore, the same has been issued after six years i.e. unreasonable period. The aforesaid seems to be attractive but has no substance. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h of December, 2000, and therefore, it cannot be said that the same can be said to have been issued after unreasonable period. If the submissions on behalf of the assessee is accepted, in that case, the amendment in Section 11D by Finance Act, 2000 making Section 11D applicable retrospectively with effect from 20/09/1991 would become nugatory. If the show cause notice is issued after five or six years or unreasonable period from the amendment of Section 11D by Finance Act, 2000 then the assessee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. FOR THE APPELLANT : M/S TRIVEDI & GUPTA, ADVOCATE FOR THE OPPONENT : MR SUDHIR M MEHTA, ADVOCATE ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) [1.0] Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the learned tribunal ) dated 09/06/2004 by which the learned tribunal has dismissed the said Appeal preferred by the appellant and has confirmed the dem .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

yment of excise duty to Cigarettes? (ii) Whether the Board Circulars dated 06/07/1990 and 01/04/1981 and the Trade Notice dated 08/08/1986 did not establish that Notification No.355/86 in effect conferred benefit on the manufacturer in the nature of Set Off and the same was not in the nature of an exemption notification simplicitor? (iii) Whether by virtue of the operation of Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986, the appellants had in fact paid the full effective duty on the final products .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s reasonable on the ground that this is a mere technicality? [2.0] The facts leading to the present Appeal in a nutshell are as under; [2.1] The appellant herein - M/s. GTC Industries Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the assessee ) was engaged inter alia in the manufacture of machine rolled cigarettes falling under Chapter 24 of the Central Excise Tarrif Act, 1985. The factory premises of the assessee was visited by the Officers of the Preventive Branch of Central Excise, Head Quarters, Vadodara .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owed interalia details providing variety, brand of cigarettes under clearance, value amount of duty payable and other charges recoverable from the customer etc. (iv) GTC also maintained PLA register for making entries relating to deposits & debits of Central Excise duty. [2.2] During the course of the checks, Officers noticed that the assessee was availing partial exemption from payment of duty under Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986 as amended from time to time in respect of machin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rolled cigarettes. For arriving at consumption of Cut Tobaco in the manufacture of such machine rolled cigarettes, assessee submitted to the Central Excise Department Blend and Brand Information in respect of each brand of cigarettes manufactured by them. On the basis of the formula adopted in such Blend and Brand information , GTC calculated the amount of exemption available to them under Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986 at the time of clearance of machine rolled cigarettes. The asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

01/03/1994 and consequently recovered the entire amount of excise duty from the customer, and therefore, it was fond that the said extra amount was charged to their customer representing excise duty and it was equal to the amount of concession availed by them under Notification No.355/86-CE. Therefore, appropriate authority issued notice upon the assessee dated 05/12/2000 in exercise of powers under Section 11D of the Act. It was found by the Officer that the assessee recovered total amount of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er Section 11D of the Act. The assessee was called upon to show cause why penalty should not be imposed upon them under Rule 210 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for commencement of the provisions of Section 11D of the Act. The Joint Commissioner of Central Excise held in favour of the assessee. The order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise was subject matter of Appeal before the first appellate authority to set aside the order passed by the Joint Commissioner. The Commissioner ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

off and such payment has been accepted by the Department. It was contended that Section 11D shall not be applicable. Before the learned tribunal the assessee heavily relied upon Trade Notice No.153/86 dated 02/07/1996 and Trade Notice No.174/86 dated 08/08/1986 in support of their case that Notification No.355/86-CE was set off Notification and not general exemption Notification. It was also contended on behalf of the assessee that in the aforesaid Trade Notices, Department construed Notificatio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on granting Set Off of the duty paid on the input viz., cut tobacco while paying duty on the finished product i.e. Cigarettes or is a notification granting exemption, simplicitor from payment of excise duty to Cigarettes?:- [3.2] Shri Uday Joshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has vehemently submitted that in the facts of the case the learned tribunal has materially erred in not properly appreciating and /or interpreting Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986. [3.3] It .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n granted to the finished product is quantified and indicated as a particular percentage or amount. It is submitted that such amount of set off of duty paid on the input was as such utilized while making payment of excise duty on the finished product. It is submitted that admittedly the assessee was entitled to set off of the duty paid on the input, namely, Cut Tobaco. It is submitted that therefore if the Notification No.355/86-CE have been considered as Notification granting set off of duty, i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed product. It is submitted that therefore Department also construed that Notification No.355/86-CE was notification granting set off of duty and not exemption as now sought to be contended by the Department. [3.4] In support of the above submissions, Shri Joshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of J.K. Synthetics Vs. CCE, Jaipur reported in 1996 (81) ELT 648. It is submitted that in the case before the Hon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Notification No.225/86-CE; (ii) CCE Vs. ITC Ltd. reported in 1993 (67) ELT 852; (iii) Andhra Pradesh Paper Mills Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Guntur reported in 1987 (27) ELT 692. [3.5] Making the above submissions, it is requested to answer question no.(i) in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. [4.0] (ii) Whether the Board Circulars dated 06/07/1990 and 01/04/1981 and the Trade Notice dated 08/08/1986 did not establish that Notification No.355/86 in effect conferred be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Trade Notices are binding to the Department. In support of his above submissions, Shri Joshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has relied upon the followed decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court; (i) Desh Bandhu Gupta and Co. Vs. Delhi Stock Exchange Association Ltd. reported in (1979) 4 SCC 565; (ii) Collector of CE, Guntur Vs. Andhra Sugar Ltd. reported in 1988 (38) ELT 564; (iii) State of Tamilnadu Vs. Mahi Traders reported in 1989 (40) ELT 266; (iv) UCO Bank, Calcutta Vs .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cts and hence were within their rights to recover the full duty from their customers? [5.1] Now so far as question no.(iii) is concerned, it is vehemently submitted by Shri Joshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee that the duty suffered in respect of inputs in the present case (Cut Tobaco) by consequent credit in set off account can very well be used for effective payment of duty on finished goods by debiting the set off account for payment of duty on the finished goods. In su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

spect of payment of duty under Notification No.355/86 when the duty collected from the buyer of the finished products was not more than the duty already paid on the input and the duty paid on the finished product at the time of removal cumulatively?:- [6.1] Now so far as question no.(iv) is concerned, it is vehemently submitted by Shri Joshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee that the show cause notice was issued for the period covering January, 1993 to March, 1995 on dated 05 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion 11D of the Act cannot be invoked by issuing show cause notice dated 05/12/2000. It is submitted that this is because of the fact that the said finalization of the assessment ought to have been challenged by the Department or at the best, a show cause notice ought to have been issued within reasonable time as held by the Hon ble Supreme Court in catena of decisions. It is therefore submitted that as such show cause notice was either beyond the period of limitation and /or was issued after unr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Elastic Industries Vs. Union of India reported in 2008 (222) ELT 340. [6.2] Making the above submissions, it is requested to allow the present Appeal and answer question no.(iv) in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. [7.0] The present Appeal is opposed by Shri Sudhir Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue. [7.1] It is vehemently submitted that as such Notification No.355/86-CE is very clear and it is a Notification for exemption. It is submitted that therefore th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sumer). It is submitted that therefore the assessee collected more amount of excise duty then paid and did not recover the excise duty on the final product from the customers, after deducting the excise duty as per Notification No.355/86-CE. It is submitted that therefore the difference of the amount of actual excise duty and the amount of set off of duty paid on input - Cut Tobaco would be enrichment, and therefore, the assessee was not liable to keep the same with it, and therefore, Section 11 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

claiming the set off of duty paid on input. It is submitted that therefore there is no question of any conflict between Notification No.355/86-CE and Trade Notice No. 153/86 dated 02/07/1996 and Trade Notice No. 174/86 dated 08/08/1986 as sought to be contended on behalf of the assessee. It is submitted that therefore the decisions, which are relied upon by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee, shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. [7.2] Now so far as the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be of any assistance to the assessee. It is submitted that similar decisions of the tribunal, which are relied upon also shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. [7.3] Now so far as the contention on behalf of the assessee that the show cause notice was either beyond the period of limitation and /or issued after unreasonable period is concerned, it is submitted that Section 11D of the Act has been amended by Finance Act, 2000 making it applicable retrospectively effective with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

retrospectively nugatory. It is submitted that therefore in the present case when the show cause notice has been issued on 05/12/2000 the same cannot be said to be either beyond the period of limitation and /or beyond unreasonable period. Making the above submissions, it is requested to dismiss the present Appeal and answer the questions against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. [8.0] Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length. Now so far as the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

falling under sub heading no.2403.11 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act,1985 (5 of 1986), from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), as is equivalent to the duty of excise leviable under the said Central Excises and Salt Act already paid on Cut Tobaco falling under sub-heading No.2409.90 of the said Schedule and used in the manufacture of such Cigarettes. Explanation: For the purpose of this notification, the expres .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntral Excise Tariff Act, 1985, from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the Central Excises and Salt Act,1944 as is equivalent to the duty of excise leviable under the said Central Excises and Salt Act already paid on Cut Tobaco falling under sub heading No.2404.90 of the said Schedule and used in the manufacture of such Cigarettes. Therefore, on fair reading of the Notification it can be said to be and rightly held to be exemption Notification, and therefore, while making payme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Notification. It may be a different thing that while making the payment of excise duty on the final product - Cigarettes the assessee might use such credit of the duty of excise already paid on Cut Tobaco. However, by that, it cannot be said that Notification No.355/86-CE is a Notification granting set off of excise on the duty already paid on Cut Tobaco as sought to be contended on behalf of the assessee. [8.2] Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

before the Hon ble Supreme Court such controversy was not raised, which is raised in the present case. Under the circumstances, the said decision shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. In view of the above, question no.(i) is answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. [9.0] Now so far as reliance placed upon Trade Notice No.153/86 dated 02/07/1996 and Trade Notice No.174/86 dated 08/08/1986 and the Board Circular are concerned, and the case on behalf of the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- Cut Tobaco. The said Trade Notices, as such, cannot be said to be in conflict with the Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986. As observed and held hereinabove, Notification No.355/86-CE dated 24/06/1986 is a Notification granting exemption on excise duty payable on Cigarettes to the extent of duty paid on the input, namely, Cut Tobaco. Under the circumstance, question no.(ii) is answered against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. [10.0] Now so far as question no.(iii) is concerned .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

id ₹ 20/- towards excise duty on input, namely, Cut Tobaco. As per exemption Notification No.355/86-CE excise duty liability would be ₹ 80/- only. In the present case though the assessee paid the excise duty at ₹ 80/- (after debiting ₹ 20/- paid on input, namely, Cut Tobaco) they recovered excise duty at ₹ 100/- from the customer. Thus, ₹ 20/- was recovered by the assessee in excess of the duty payable, and therefore, to that extent, ₹ 20/- can be said t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Rules made thereunder, (every person who is liable to pay duty under this Act or Rules made thereunder, and has collected any amount in excess of the duty assessed or determined and paid on any excisable goods under this Act or the Rule made thereunder from the buyer of such goods) in any manner as representing duty of excise, shall forthwith pay the amount so collected to the credit of the Central Government. (ii) Where any amount is required to be paid to the credit of the Central Government .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

excess of the amount specified in the notice) and thereupon such person shall pay the amount so determined. (iv) The amount paid to the credit of the Central Government under Sub Section (1) or Sub Section (3) shall be adjusted against the duty of excise payable by the person on finalisation of assessment or any other proceeding for determination of the duty of excise relating to the excisable goods referred to in Sub Section(i). (v) Where any surplus is left after the adjustment under Sub Secti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the assessee and in favour of the revenue. [11.0] Now so far as the question whether the show cause notice was beyond the period of limitation and /or after unreasonable period is concerned, it is the case on behalf of the assessee that the show cause notice came to be issued in the year 2000 for the alleged transactions for the period between 1993 to 1995, and therefore, the same has been issued after six years i.e. unreasonable period. The aforesaid seems to be attractive but has no substance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Highlight: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

News: Notification regarding GST rate for branded cereal, pulses and flour

Highlight: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

Highlight: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Non-payment of service tax - maintenance and repair charges - appellants had knowingly and deliberately shown the repair charges as job work charges to mislead about their taxability - demand confirmed.

Highlight: BAS - execution of the project of smart card for vehicle registration – implementing the SOC-VRC project - The fact that the Government has outsourced some part of the work and paid certain consideration for such outsourced work, does not make the activity subject to service tax.

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Cess paid instead of SGST

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Circular: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg.

News: Cabinet approves Extension of time period of the Scheme "Special Industry Initiative for J&K" (Sll J&K) - Udaan

Highlight: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg. - Trade Notice

Highlight: Amendments in Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 –reg. - Various amendments are made in Chapter-4 of Hand Book of Procedures 2015-2020.

Forum: GST rates on mobile recharge business

Circular: Constitution of National Anti-profiteering Authority (NAA) under GST-reg.

Forum: import purchase

Highlight: Sharing of expenses - BAS - promotion of business of group companies - sharing of expenditure for common facilities cannot be treated as service by one to another in such arrangement.

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Forum: 3B mistake

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

Circular: Certain Clarifications sought on Construction Services provided in the Real Estate Sector – reg.

News: Anti-dumping duty on import of bus/truck tyres from China

News: Fast-track GST refund, else ₹ 65K cr may be stuck: Exporters

Highlight: It is open to the Settlement Commission to use best judgment in arrival of the figure. Nonetheless it has to explain the manner in which the best judgment figure has been arrived at by the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) - advances given to societies - in the absence of legal right of the assessee in the said society the amount advanced cannot be treated as deemed income.

Highlight: When electrical installations are treated as plant and machinery the depreciation has to be allowed @ 25% as per provisions contained u/s 32

TMI Note: Capital Gain - transfer of right in the land or transfer of land itself - addition u/s 50C - Harassment to the honest tax payers

Highlight: Option to avail composition scheme under GST by electronically filing an intimation in FORM GST CMP-02 and FORM GST ITC-03 upto 30-9-2017 - See Rule 3(3A)

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply for the purposes of computing exemption u/s 11 to 13.

Highlight: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability - CBDT issues draft notification

TMI Note: Certain ICDS provisions are inconsistent with judicial precedents. Whether these judicial precedents would prevail over ICDS.

Highlight: Provisions of ICDS shall prevail w.e.f. AY 2017-18 to the transactional issues dealt therein over earlier judicial pronouncements.

Notification: Levy of anti dumping duty on New/unused pneumatic radial tyres with or without tubes and/or flap of rubber (including tubeless tyres) having normal rim dia code above 16 originating in, or exported from China PR

News: Voluntary Reporting of Estimated Current Income and Advance Tax Liability

TMI Note: In case of conflict between ICDS and other specific provisions of the Income-tax rules, 1962 governing taxation of income like rules 9A, 9B etc. of the Rules, which provisions shall prevail.

TMI Note: Does ICDS apply to computation of Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act or Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT) u/s 115JC of the Act.

TMI Note: Where a term has not been defined under ICDS, nor under the Act, but has different interpretations given to it by the courts in tax cases, and in ICAI Accounting Standards, which interpretation would prevail while interpreting ICDS.

TMI Note: Whether the provisions of ICDS apply to a non-resident who claims the benefit of a double taxation avoidance agreement (DTAA).

TMI Note: In case any of the ICDS provisions is contrary to a circular or press release issued by the CBDT, which would prevail over the other.

TMI Note: ICDS-I requires disclosure of significant accounting policies and other ICDS requires specific disclosures. Where is the taxpayer required to make such disclosures specified in ICDS.

Notification: Income Computation and Disclosure Standards (ICDS) - New ICDS to be effective from AY 2017-18

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Highlight: GST - Detention of goods under transport - discrepancy in documents - the statutory provisions provide a mechanism for adjudication following detention of goods including for the provisional release thereof pending adjudication - HC

Highlight: Reassessment - first few paragraphs of the assessment order dealt with objections and disposed of accordingly - Unfortunately, the manner in which the AO has decided the issue is wholly unsustainable in law - HC

Highlight: Business expenditure u/s 37 - liquidated damage - breach of contract terms - Expenditure was not incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law - cannot be disallowed - HC

Highlight: Valuation - inclusion of reimbursement of expenses - managing participation of clients in certain mela, fairs, promotional activities etc. - They are liable to service tax on the gross amount received - They cannot restrict their tax liability to only agency commission

Highlight: TDS liability - ITAT confirmed the liability - We do not see how it is possible for us to uphold the order of the Tribunal and when it purports to decide two Appeals of the Revenue by single paragraph conclusion - HC

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - sufficiency of material available with the AO to form a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment - bogus purchases - seller refused to respond - notice would not be interfered with - HC

Highlight: Exemption u/s 11 - education activities - transport and hostel facilities surplus cannot be considered as business income of the assessee society

News: Draft Notification for insertion of new rule 39A in the Income-tax Rules, 1962 – comments and suggestions-reg.



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version