Seeking for 8010 brain dumps that performs great in real test? furnishes most current and 2022 current 8010 Actual Questions with sample test Questions and even Answers for fresh matters of PRIMA 8010 Test. Practice our 8010 Latest Questions Inquiries and Answers to be able to Improve your comprehension and pass your current test with Substantial Marks. We assurance your success inside the Test Centre, covering all typically the references of test and developing your current Familiarity with the 8010 test. Pass with the 8010 brain dumps.

Exam Code: 8010 Practice exam 2022 by team
Operational Risk Manager (ORM)
PRIMA Operational health
Killexams : PRIMA Operational health - BingNews Search results Killexams : PRIMA Operational health - BingNews Killexams : Orangeburg native named risk professional of year

The South Carolina Public Risk Management Association Risk Professional of the Year Award aims to raise the profile and recognize an individual who exemplifies excellence, innovation and commitment to the Risk and Insurance Management field and the outstanding programs the honoree has implemented within their organization.

“As our organizations and communities continue to sort through the disruption and disarray caused by exact events safety & risk professionals have demonstrated their value as strategic leaders who adapt to change, strengthen resilience and promote innovation,” said SC PRIMA President of the Board of Directors Donald Henderson.

“Demetrius Rumph embodies this, embedding safety & risk management practices to address safety & risk concerns within his organization. His dynamic leadership has revolutionized and change the safety culture at the City of Columbia. His outstanding accomplishments in the field of Risk Management has made him a deserving recipient of this years’ SC PRIMA Risk Professional Year Award. But, his greatest award and reward is for all employees to go home unhurt and unharmed to their families and friends each and every day.”

People are also reading…

Rumph began his career in the military and served as an air traffic controller operator in the United States Air Force, specializing in vital services in assisting civilian and military aircraft to avoid collisions, maintain safe aircraft separation during flight, maintain flight safety and airport ground operations.

Following his military career, he worked in the manufacturing industry in various roles such as safety coordinator, safety advisor, health and safety coordinator, health and safety manager and regional environmental, health and safety manager.

During his tenure working in the manufacturing industry and public sector, he was responsible for the occupational, safety, health and risk management programs/processes for all his facilities.

Rumph holds a bachelor of arts in interdisciplinary studies with a concentration in business management and psychology from the University of South Carolina. He obtained his construction-manager of environmental safety and health (C-MESH) from N.C. State University and Safety and Health Council of North Carolina.

He is an authorized OSHA construction trainer, Southeastern OTI Education Center. He is a certified risk manager from the South Carolina Association of Counties Property, Liability and Trust, certified in first aid/ CPR /AED, certified ALICE active shooter instructor as well as certified in OSHA Trench, Shoring and Excavation and National Safety Council Certified Defensive Driving Training instructor. Rumph has received several safety achievement awards, but his most notable prestigious safety achievements are the 2018 J.J. Keller Safety Professional of the Year Award and recently, the 2022 South Carolina Public Risk Management Association Risk Professional of The Year.

Rumph is an Orangeburg native and an Orangeburg-Wilkinson graduate, class of 1982.

Sat, 06 Aug 2022 05:15:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Norwegian Prima Pushing the Boundaries for Food and Beverage


“We have always been creators and innovators when it comes to a lot of things and certainly in food and beverage, and with our new Prima class of ships, we wanted to really take things to a new level,” said Wesley Cort, vice president of food and beverage operations for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings.

“We are honing in on popular concepts we already have, like Cagney’s (Steakhouse) and Le Bistro, and are improving those, while adding a lot of new and exciting concepts.

“We have nine new concepts aboard the Norwegian Prima,” Cort continued.

Among the new venues aboard the Prima that Cort pointed out is the Palomar, a Mediterranean seafood specialty restaurant.

Wes Cort

Another new venue will be Indulge with 11 different venues from noodles around the world to Indian cuisine to Texas barbecue, salads and greens.  It is an indoor/outdoor dining and leisure concept.

The Prima will also feature Norwegian’s Food Republic venues with different fares and small plates in addition to not one but two full-service Starbucks locations.

While all the Norwegian ships serve sushi, the Prima will feature the Nama sushi house, which Cort described as being much more contemporary, calling its sushi and sashimi “masterpieces.”

Nama will also offer a full list of sakes created by a certified sake professional, who has also curated the menu, Cort explained.

The Prima will have two main dining rooms, the Commodore midship, and the Hudson’s aft with full floor to ceiling windows offering 270-degree views off the stern.

Said Cort: “For the first time, we are going to offer a menu that is unlike anything we have done in the past. The industry has not evolved in terms of the main dining room offerings.

“For years the concept has been to offer a different menu every night to give guests more choices, when ships did not have so many specialty restaurants. So, in a sense, the industry has been stuck in neutral for years.

“Since we will have nine specialty restaurants aboard the Prima, six complimentary restaurants and a food hall with 11 different venues, we felt we could do something different with the main dining rooms and focus not so much on the number of dishes offered but on the quality of the food.

“So, we will have a fixed menu. It will be expanded so we will offer more than we currently do, but it will be fixed.

“Our research has proven that this will allow our culinary teams, our chefs and our cooks, to execute the meals to the best that can be done.

“The result will be more of a premium menu.

“And it is not like our guests will not have choices in the main dining rooms. Dishes will range from Spanish paella, Italian mussels prepared in white wine sauce to fully vegetarian options and a build-your-own-pasta section with more than 24 combinations by mixing and matching different pastas, sauces and proteins.

“This is going to be new; this is the way to go,” he said.

Another change will be a smaller self-service buffet, because other venues will also be serving breakfast and lunch.

Debuting on the Prima, the revamped menus will roll out on the rest of the 17 ships in the fleet throughout 2023.

Excerpt from Cruise Industry News Quarterly Magazine: Summer 2022 

Tue, 02 Aug 2022 03:29:00 -0500 en-gb text/html
Killexams : Harris Williams Advises Prima Solutions on the Sale of Prima XL to Duck Creek Technologies

Harris Williams, a global investment bank specializing in M&A advisory services, announces it advised Prima Solutions on the sale of Prima XL, France-based Prima Solutions’ flagship commercial reinsurance technology solution, to Duck Creek Technologies (NASDAQ: DCT; Duck Creek), the intelligent solutions provider defining the future of property and casualty (P&C) insurance. The transaction terms also include an agreement to sell Prima Compliance for Solvency II, a compliance solution which Duck Creek intends to continue offering in the French marketplace. The transaction was led by Julien Oussadon and Luke Clifford of the Harris Williams Technology Group.

“The combination of Prima XL with Duck Creek’s large customer base presents strong cross-sell opportunities and creates a powerful global platform of scale in the reinsurance software space,” said Julien Oussadon, a managing director at Harris Williams.

“Throughout the sale process, Harris Williams provided outstanding support and advice to Prima Solutions. The team was pivotal in successfully positioning Prima XL and Prima Compliance, leading to an exceptional outcome. We look forward to watching the two platforms increase their leadership positions in their respective markets,” said Julien Victor, previously CEO of Prima Solutions, who has joined Duck Creek as managing director, reinsurance management.

Prima XL is a powerful, intuitive, cloud-based reinsurance software that collects, centralizes, and analyzes all data for insurers, reinsurers, and brokers. Prima XL tracks all the information related to reinsurance policies (treaties and facultative policies, claims, incidents, accounting data, technical data, auxiliary data, financial data, and more), allowing insurance businesses to manage all of their policies from underwriting to commutation and renewals. Prima XL is a flexible solution tailored to international organizations using multiple currencies and multiple GAAP requirements.

Prima Compliance is a cloud platform for managing regulatory compliance to satisfy Europe’s Solvency II directive. Combining actuarial calculations (Solvency II Pillar 1) and internal regulatory reporting at the national and European levels (Solvency II Pillar 3), Prima Compliance is a secure, all-in-one solution that is always compliant with Solvency II regulations, giving insurance organizations peace of mind when it comes to European regulatory compliance.

Duck Creek is the intelligent solutions provider defining the future of the P&C and general insurance industry. The company is the platform upon which modern insurance systems are built, enabling the industry to capitalize on the power of the cloud to run agile, intelligent, and evergreen operations. Authenticity, purpose, and transparency are core to Duck Creek, and it believes insurance should be there for individuals and businesses when, where, and how they need it most. The company’s market-leading solutions are available on a standalone basis or as a full suite, and all are available via Duck Creek OnDemand.

Harris Williams, an investment bank specializing in M&A advisory services, advocates for sellers and buyers of companies worldwide through critical milestones and provides thoughtful advice during the lives of their businesses. By collaborating as one firm across Industry Groups and geographies, the firm helps its clients achieve outcomes that support their objectives and strategically create value. Harris Williams is committed to execution excellence and to building enduring, valued relationships that are based on mutual trust. Harris Williams is a subsidiary of the PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (NYSE: PNC).

The Harris Williams Technology Group advises leading private and public companies, founders, and private equity, growth equity and venture capital firms on mergers and acquisitions and capital-raising transactions worldwide. The Technology Group has deep domain expertise in software and technology-enabled services and dedicated focus areas across a variety of vertical software applications and end markets. For more information on the Technology Group and its exact transactions, visit the Technology Group’s section of the Harris Williams website.

Harris Williams LLC is a registered broker-dealer and member of FINRA and SIPC. Harris Williams & Co. Ltd is a private limited company incorporated under English law with its registered office at 8th Floor, 20 Farringdon Street, London EC4A 4AB, UK, registered with the Registrar of Companies for England and Wales (registration number 07078852). Harris Williams & Co. Ltd is authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Harris Williams & Co. Corporate Finance Advisors GmbH is registered in the commercial register of the local court of Frankfurt am Main, Germany, under HRB 107540. The registered address is Bockenheimer Landstrasse 33-35, 60325 Frankfurt am Main, Germany (email address: [email protected]). Geschäftsführer/Directors: Jeffery H. Perkins, Paul Poggi. (VAT No. DE321666994). Harris Williams is a trade name under which Harris Williams LLC, Harris Williams & Co. Ltd and Harris Williams & Co. Corporate Finance Advisors GmbH conduct business.

src="" style="width:0;height:0" />

For media inquiries, please contact Julia Moore at [email protected].

Source: Harris Williams

Wed, 13 Jul 2022 05:33:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : Duck Creek Leads A New Era In Reinsurance Software With Its Agreement To Acquire The Premier Cloud-Based Solution, Prima XL

Para Pelanggan Yang Dihormati,

Dimaklumkan bahawa soal selidik ini bertujuan untuk mendapatkan maklum balas pelanggan berhubung tahap pengamalan nilai-nilai murni di jabatan/agensi Kerajaan yang memberikan perkhidmatan kepada tuan/puan.

Berdasarkan pengalaman atau pemerhatian semasa berurusan dengan BERNAMA, sila beri maklum balas kepada pernyataan-pernyataan yang berikut dalam konteks semasa. Kami menghargai maklum balas yang jujur dan rasional daripada anda.

Maklum balas yang diberikan adalah SULIT.

Terima kasih kerana sudi meluangkan masa untuk mengisi soal selidik ini.

Sila klik pautan berikut:

Tue, 28 Jun 2022 15:16:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Codexis, Inc. (CDXS) CEO John Nicols on Q2 2022 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

Codexis, Inc. (NASDAQ:CDXS) Q2 2022 Earnings Conference Call August 4, 2022 4:30 PM ET

Company Participants

Brendan Strong - Argot Partners

John Nicols - President and Chief Executive Officer

Ross Taylor - Chief Financial Officer

Stephen Dilly - Board Member

Conference Call Participants

Steven Mah - Cowen and Company

Matthew Hewitt - Craig-Hallum

Ramakanth Swayampakula - H.C. Wainwright


Welcome to the Codexis Second Quarter 2022 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this event is being recorded.

And now I'll turn the call over to Brendan Strong from Argot Partners. Please go ahead.

Brendan Strong

Thank you, operator. With me today are John Nicols, Codexis' President and CEO; Ross Taylor, Codexis' Chief Financial Officer; and Dr. Stephen Dilly, current Board Member and incoming President and CEO of Codexis. During this call, management will be making a number of forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including our guidance for 2022 revenues, product revenues and gross margin on product revenues, prospects for our Life Sciences Tools, food sector and Biotherapeutics product businesses and our expectations regarding the sales of one of our proprietary enzymes to Pfizer for the manufacture of their COVID-19 antiviral therapeutic, PAXLOVID.

To the extent that statements contained in this call are not descriptions of historical facts regarding Codexis, they are forward-looking statements reflecting the beliefs and expectations of management as of the statement date, August 4, 2022. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements because they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that are, in some cases, beyond Codexis' control and that could materially affect actual results.

Additional information about factors that could materially affect actual results can be found in Codexis' annual report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 28, 2022, and on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on May 9, 2022, including under the caption Risk Factors and in Codexis' other periodic reports filed with the SEC. Codexis expressly disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by law.

I'll now turn the call over to John.

John Nicols

Thank you, Brendan. Good afternoon, everyone. First, it's great to spend this time with all of you today. Those who have been following us for a while know that for the last five-plus years, we have been on a very strong, sustained growth trajectory with a remarkable track record of financial and strategic execution. Our confidence and optimism for our business remains steadfast, as you will hear us reiterate many times on today's call. At the same time, as we outlined a few weeks ago, our R&D revenue is not building as quickly as we originally anticipated, which led to our first significant downward guidance revision in exact memory.

As always, you know us as transparent and clear communicators. And we wanted to make sure that today, we proactively provide you with key insights into those bumps in the road and how we are managing them. Still know that the fundamental strengths of Codexis are unwavering and will continue to enable us to deliver significant and sustained long-term growth, benefiting our customers and shareholders alike.

Let's get into the results for the quarter, starting with slide 3. We are proud of our second quarter product revenue and first half of 2022 revenues overall. You can see this positive trend on the right-hand side of Slide 3, stemming from growth not only within pharma manufacturing, but also in other verticals like food and nutrition. With total year-over-year revenue growth of 51% for the quarter and year-over-year product revenue growth of 135%, we are executing on our goals to expand product adoption, ramp up commercialization and establish new offerings.

In the second quarter, our base of customers generating significant revenue remained strong and wide with 18 customers who contributed over $100,000 in revenue, six of which contributed over $1 million in revenue. We'll provide an in-depth overview of each of our business segments shortly, but first, I am pleased to share our latest annual pipeline snapshot update. For the last seven years now in this August investor call, we have provided an update to our pipeline of programs and products across the company to provide insights into how we are executing on and expanding our growth opportunities. Today, we published this annual pipeline snapshot as of June 30, 2022.

Let me take a moment to discuss a few of the most notable metrics in this year's update. As you will see on Slides 4 and 5, the total number of our pipeline programs again increased by over 20% to 94% from 78% last year. Both pipelines for Performance Enzymes and Biotherapeutics grew double digits annually to 70 and 24 programs, respectively. Importantly, five more performance enzymes were commercialized over the last 12 months. We now have 22 commercial enzyme products doubled from three years ago and up 29% versus last year.

You will also note the step-out growth in programs we have been executing in the life science tool sector where we now boast 21 total pipeline programs, up 62% from 13 last year. We are also pleased with the advancements across our biotherapeutics pipeline shown on Slide 5, where we continue to gain momentum reflected by the addition of six new programs since last year's snapshot. Consistent with our existing business strategy, we are hard at work to advance and expand our pipeline of oral enzyme therapies and gene therapy assets. Our business model is designed to consistently accelerate the number of pipeline assets, driving the expansion of new programs in high-growth verticals and increasing our total number of shots on goal.

As seen on Slide 6, we have steadily been doing just that across each focus area within our broader segments. As we continue trending in this direction, we look forward to advancing a growing proportion of these assets towards commercialization, while also working to increase the average program speed to market and peak revenue potential.

Broken out by segment on Slide 7, the expansion trend becomes even more evident. The most salient points include the more than doubling of commercialized products within our Performance Enzyme pipeline and the significant increase in biotherapeutic programs over these last four years. It is gratifying to look back and show such significant and consistent growth in application of our CodeEvolver enzyme engineering platform over the years. This is exactly what we mean when we say that Codexis is enabling the promise of synthetic biology, bringing sustainability benefits and innovation to today's world. We believe Codexis is the only synthetic biology company currently delivering real benefits to today's markets.

Before I hand the call to Ross to share details on the second quarter financial results, let me first provide some detailed updates across each of our businesses.

Moving to Slide 8. Sustainable Manufacturing is where Codexis has differentiated itself as an established leader in engineering enzymes that reliably enable customers to overhaul manufacturing processes and increase deficiencies across an array of applications. Using our unique CodeEvolver platform, we are unrivaled in our ability to quickly discover and commercialize these high-value enzymes at scale to dramatically reduce the cost and increase the sustainability of manufacturing and products. With a diverse customer base spanning branded and generic drug companies, food and beverage providers and other industrial manufacturers, this market continues to represent a large majority of the company's revenues.

Small molecule pharmaceutical processes have been and remain a core target for growing the sustainable manufacturing market for Codexis. As a result of our long-standing efforts to revolutionize pharma manufacturing by pioneering the use of enzymes in this space, Codexis has established the credibility and supply chain capacity to execute on key partnerships with some of the biggest players in pharma. We currently serve 21 of the 25 largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, helping them adopt and install novel Codexis enzymes for manufacturing their APIs. Through our work with industry powerhouses like Merck and Pfizer on JANUVIA and PAXLOVID, respectively, Codexis is becoming increasingly known for the quality and commercial scale of our enzymes and our ability to deliver meaningful cost savings, enhance sustainability and operational efficiencies for our customers.

To that end, we recently announced that Codexis has entered into a multiyear agreement with Pfizer to supply an enzyme used in the manufacturing process for PAXLOVID. We are incredibly proud of our role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic to date, and we are pleased that this opportunity allowed us to demonstrate our ability to rapidly fulfill orders at unprecedented scale and deliver significant cost savings to our customer. While the revenue opportunity that we are demonstrating from PAXLOVID in 2022 is not expected to continue in 2023.

We view our contributions to support Pfizer as an important proof point that has not gone unnoticed by other pharmaceutical manufacturers. Nicely illustrating our growing commercial enzyme installed base and pharma manufacturing, we are pleased to report strong seven-digit sales to multiple additional customers during the second quarter, including Merck, Allergan, Kyorin and Urovant.

In addition to the deep relationships we've cultivated with household pharma names, we are continually working to widen our scope with smaller biotech and generic companies. Here, we are pleased to update you on our excellent progress to get our enzymes installed in future generic Sitagliptin manufacturing processes. On top of our previously announced agreement with Almelo in India, we now have supply agreements in place with four other leading generic pharmaceutical manufacturers. More agreements are in the works, and we have supplied quantities of our enzymes to over two dozen other aspiring generic Sitagliptin companies.

Note that Sitagliptin is the first of Codexis' pharma end products to approach its transition from the branded to generic stage. Our business model and patent positions enable us to sustain revenue through other future generic transitions as well. Importantly, the advantages offered by our engineered enzymes can extend far beyond the pharmaceutical manufacturing space. We are steadily growing in other industries and exciting new verticals, especially the food industry. With the shorter development time lines and lower regulatory hurdles found in these industries as compared to pharma manufacturing, they offer ample opportunity for us to capture additional market share and ensure that our enzymes reach the market more quickly.

As mentioned previously, we are delighted with our results in the food sector with over $1 million in sales this quarter, led by enzyme sales to Tate & Lyle but also spreading nicely across other food and nutrition customers as well. We look forward to continuing to broaden our reach in the sector, both with existing and new customers.

Let's now shift to life science tools on Slide 9. We first identified this area as a target market just a few years ago. Since then, we have been hard at work making inroads into this space as we demonstrate the potential for Codexis engineered enzymes to Boost a widening range of life science and molecular biology applications such as next-generation sequencing, nucleic acid synthesis and more. This market is very attractive given its high growth, short commercialization cycles and above-average margin prospects and the fact that enzymes developed for life science tools applications can often be marketed to multiple customers.

Today, the large majority of our revenues are generated from a growing list of bespoke enzyme R&D projects with specific partners. As we reported a few weeks ago, several of these life science customers have paused or slowed their project work with us in 2022, broadly due to a general increase in R&D cost consciousness in the space. That is leading us to reduce our prior $12 million life science tools revenue outlook for 2022 to similar levels as last year or around $7 million. We view this lack of growth as a temporary situation and are highly confident to recover significant sector revenue growth in 2023 and beyond.

As I shared in the pipeline snapshot review, the number of new programs in life science tools has been booming, nearly tripling in just the last two years. Those programs are poised to advance and expand boding well for future renewed step-out revenue growth in the sector. Plus, we are seeing growing traction for our slate of recently launched widely marketed products, including Codex HiFi DNA polymerase for use in next-generation sequencing, Codex HiCap RNA polymerase for use in messenger RNA manufacturing and Codex HiTemp Reverse Transcriptase for use in qPCR viral diagnostics.

Each of the three enzymes is engineered to offer differentiated and highly beneficial performance attributes such as enhanced diagnostic fidelity, thermal stability, robustness, cycle time reductions and/or reduced waste generation. While these recently launched products are a minor contributor to today's sector revenues, we are pleased with these products progress to date and continue to see each of these as substantial revenue generators in the future.

Our HiFi DNA polymerase is tracking below plan so far this year as we have determined that modifying the product formulation would enhance NGS adoption rates. That reformulation is completed and renewed customer trialing is now back in gear. On the flip side, we now have a growing list of customers buying our HiCap RNA polymerase for developmental stage messenger RNA manufacturing installations. And we are quite encouraged by the positive trial results that we have seen at multiple customers for the more recently launched HiTemp reverse transcriptase for qPCR viral detection applications.

In addition, our partnerships with life science industry innovators continue to push the boundaries of how we can leverage the power of our CodeEvolver platform to deliver significant performance improvements and drive progress in this rapidly evolving market. As an example, Molecular Assemblies or MAI for short, and Codexis partnered in 2020 to engineer an enzyme to deliver differentiated and cost-effective solutions for the fully enzymatic synthesis of DNA.

In April, we announced the successful completion of one of the most intensive enzyme engineering campaigns in Codexis' history. The resulting highly evolved version of TDT polymerase delivers unparalleled coupling efficiency and speed at elevated temperatures. This enzyme both enables and significantly differentiates MAI's fully enzymatic synthesis or SES technology from other emerging players as well as versus today's industry standard non-enzymatic DNA synthesis methods, allowing MAI to produce longer, highly pure sequence-specific DNA more quickly.

On the heels of the exciting advancements on the scientific front with MAI, we just announced the execution of a commercial license and enzyme supply agreement with them. This transition from research to a commercial supply of our enzyme represents a critical inflection point on the path towards MAI's commercial launch anticipated in 2023. We are confident that once commercialized, the superior quality of this technology will enable MAI to penetrate the market and quickly become competitive with existing products.

From a Codexis perspective, we are now generating modest enzyme product revenues from MAI. We note that we also have the opportunity to generate milestone revenues as well as royalties on their product sales as a result of this agreement. And as MAI's second largest shareholder, we are excited about the potential value of our equity investment as they commercialize into the $1 billion plus and fast-growing DNA synthesis market starting next year.

Our second strategic investment is with seqWell, a developer of transformative library preparation products for various genomics and NGS applications. Much like our partnership with MAI, CodeEvolver enzyme engineering can enhance seqWell's product offerings, and we look forward to reporting on the progress of this recently established partnership over time.

Let me shift now to take a few minutes to highlight our progress building a biotherapeutic pipeline leveraging our CodeEvolver platform. Here, we are focused on discovering and advancing unique patentable oral biologic and gene therapy candidates for a widening range of human health disease challenges. No other synthetic biology company possesses such an extensive biotherapeutic discovery and development capability, and we are highly confident in Codexis' ability to capitalize on our biotherapeutic pipeline investments.

The majority of our most advanced programs are supported by growing partnerships with Nestle Health Science and Takeda. These partnerships are structured to help us de-risk, learn, cover costs and generate revenues. In addition, as we've developed more proof of relevance from our CodeEvolver platform as a drug discovery engine, we have been increasingly investing over the last few years in our own self-funded pipeline assets to enable us to retain more value from our successes in this arena.

As we shared in the pipeline snapshot update, over the last year, we have added six self-funded biotherapeutic programs in pursuit of this goal. While we are optimistic across our 15 current self-funded preclinical programs, we are shifting our focus in favor of partnering necessitated by the current capital markets environment. Given the heavy resource investment required to advance biotherapeutic assets, we are also cognizant of the need to prioritize programs that demonstrate the most potential, something we will continue to bet as our pipeline matures. These early assets and our growing reputation as a uniquely capable drug discoverer set us up well to partner, monetize assets and control costs versus our earlier higher investment strategy. Stay tuned for us to share updates on this over the coming quarters.

Shifting to specific program updates. Let me start with CDX-7108, co-owned with Nestle Health Science for the treatment of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, or EPI, currently in a Phase 1 trial. CDX-7108 is an orally administered GI active lipase that was precisely engineered to be highly stable to the acidic conditions in the stomach, which is a key challenge for today's industry standard billion-dollar-plus pancreatic enzyme replacement therapies. We are pleased to report that the partnership has completed the first two stages of the Phase 1 trial in healthy volunteers without adverse events.

As the next step of the Phase 1 trial, we have begun dosing patients and expect to share the complete study results early in the New Year. In parallel, we are currently making excellent progress on IND-enabling work for CDX-6512 for homocystinuria. Very encouraging in vivo efficacy results have been generated in the relevant mouse model and in nonhuman primate preclinical studies. The drug substance manufacturing process is being tech transferred to our CMO partner, who will begin GMP manufacturing later in the year.

In addition, we remain on track to advance two additional developmental candidates into IND-enabling stage in 2022. One of those co-owned products is with Nestle Health Science, an oral biologic targeting an undisclosed GI disorder. That has been delayed on its initiation of IND-enabling work versus our early '22 expectations, resulting in low single-digit million dollar reduction in our expected R&D revenues from this program this year.

Alongside our pipeline of oral biologics, we are leveraging CodeEvolver to enable more effective next-generation gene therapy candidates. As previously shared, we have handed off our lead CodeEvolver engineered transgene candidates for three of the four programs to Takeda. We are extremely pleased with the momentum on this front as Takeda advances each of these through their gene therapy preclinical evaluations. Codexis also presented preclinical data at the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy 25th Annual Meeting in May.

Here, we highlighted enzyme variants engineered with our CodeEvolver platform to offer potentially improved efficacy as compared to current enzymes when administered as transgenes and gene therapies for Fabry disease, Pompe disease and hemophilia A. We view our participation in this meeting as encouraging validation of our gene therapy efforts, and we look forward to further establishing ourselves as an innovator in the space.

Now I'd like to hand the call over to Ross to take you through our financial results in more detail.

Ross Taylor

Thanks, John, and good afternoon, everyone. Let me dive into our second quarter 2022 financial results, which are summarized on Slide 11. Total revenues for the second quarter of 2022 were $38.4 million, an increase of 51% from the prior-year period. On a segment basis, $36.5 million in revenue was from the Performance Enzymes segment and $1.9 million was from Biotherapeutics. This compares to $21.6 million and $3.9 million for the Performance Enzymes and Biotherapeutics, respectively, for the prior-year period.

Product revenues for the second quarter of 2022 were $34.6 million compared to $14.7 million in the second quarter of 2021. The increase was largely due to higher enzyme sales to Pfizer for PAXLOVID as well as strong sales to other key pharma manufacturing customers. R&D revenues were $3.8 million compared to $10.7 million last year. The decrease was driven by a mix of fewer new deals being signed in 2022 and lower-than-anticipated revenue from existing customers.

Product gross margin for the second quarter of 2022 was 67% compared to 71% in the second quarter of 2021. The change was largely driven by changes in product mix, variations in prices for volume sold, namely for enzyme related to PAXLOVID and higher shipping costs.

Turning to operating expenses. Our R&D expenses for the second quarter of 2022 were $19.1 million compared to $12.8 million in the second quarter of 2021. The increase was primarily driven by increases in costs associated with higher headcount and salaries as well as higher expenses for facilities, lab supplies and outside services. SG&A expenses for the second quarter of 2022 were $10.7 million compared to $12.8 million in the second quarter of 2021.

The decrease was primarily driven by a decrease in legal fees, mostly due to the settlement of a trademark dispute and lower allocable expenses, partially offset by an increase in costs associated with higher headcount and higher outside services. The net loss for the second quarter of 2022 was $2.6 million or $0.04 per share compared to a loss of $4.3 million or $0.07 per share for the second quarter of 2021.

As of June 30, 2022, the company had $90.1 million in cash and cash equivalents, not including the $25.9 million retainer fee payment from Pfizer. Also, we have not drawn any funds from our $50 million ATM equity facility that we put in place in May of last year.

I would like to spend a moment breaking down our financial results by segment outlined on slide 12. Revenue in our Performance Enzymes business increased 69% to $36.5 million in the second quarter of 2022. Before the allocation of corporate overhead expense, operating income for this segment was $14.5 million in the second quarter for an operating profit margin of 40%. In our Biotherapeutics business, revenue was $1.9 million, and we generated an operating loss of $9.9 million, again, before the allocation of corporate overhead expenses. Our operating losses in this business increased year-over-year as we have continued to grow and advance our self-funded programs.

Moving to Slide 13. As you know, we updated our 2022 financial guidance on July 14, and we are reiterating those expectations today. We expect full-year 2022 total revenues to be in the range of $135 million to $141 million. Product revenues are expected to be in the range of $112 million to $118 million, which is the same range that we originally provided in February. This includes approximately $75 million in revenue from Pfizer.

As you may recall, when we originally provided our revenue guidance for 2022, we were anticipating $75 million to $80 million of revenue from Pfizer. While we now expect Pfizer revenue to be at the low end of this range, we expect to offset this with the strength that we are seeing in product sales from other customers. We expect R&D revenues will be in the range of $20 million to $25 million, down from approximately $40 million that was implied by our original revenue guidance for the year.

This reduction is the result of multiple factors, including some anticipated new partnerships not being signed within the time lines we expected, in part due to the macroeconomic backdrop as well as lower-than-expected revenues from existing partnerships due to delays in some project time lines. The softness in R&D revenue is across both our Performance Enzymes and Biotherapeutics segments.

Gross margin on product revenue is expected to be in the range of 65% to 70%, consistent with prior guidance. Excluding any one-time non-cash charges that may arise from our CEO transition, we anticipate R&D and SG&A expenses combined will be in a range of $136 million to $140 million for the full-year. This forecast range is down from the $150 million expectation that we described on our fourth quarter earnings call back in February, demonstrating that the expense mitigation efforts we implemented are having an impact.

Also, in line with our business strategy, we are continually evaluating opportunities to partner our programs and share the financial risk of development with some of our self-funded programs, particularly within our biotherapeutics business. Regarding cash, we anticipate that our cash flow should be positive in the second half of this year due to the $25 million payment from Pfizer. We expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents, combined with our future expectations for product revenues, R&D revenues and expense management will be sufficient to fund our planned operations through the end of 2024.

And now I'll turn the call back to John.

John Nicols

Thanks, Ross. As we near the end of our prepared remarks, I'd like to reiterate our 2022 corporate goals and catalysts, as outlined on Slide 14. In Sustainable Manufacturing, the headline over the past year has been our execution of exceptionally high-volume enzyme sales to Pfizer for their manufacture of PAXLOVID. In parallel, we are driving widened adoption and product commercializations with other pharma manufacturing customers, and we are encouraged by the accelerated uptake we are seeing in the food and industrial verticals as well.

With that in mind, we are well positioned to continue to drive double-digit growth for our non-Pfizer product sales in the coming quarters as we continue to strengthen the diversity of Codexis' business. In life science tools, we are focused on driving increased adoption and product sales for our three commercial enzymes, advancing and adding to our R&D partnerships and building long-term value from our synergistic inorganic investments with Molecular Assemblies and seqWell.

Finally, we're advancing and monetizing our pipeline of high-value assets and partnerships in Biotherapeutics. We look forward to reporting data from the Phase 1 clinical trial of CDX-7108 early next year as well as our continued progress to bring an increasing number of partnered and self-funded assets successfully into early clinical development stage over time.

In closing, I am sure you have read a few weeks ago that I am stepping down as President and CEO of Codexis in the coming days for family reasons. My wife, Marcy has suffered from a debilitating post viral infectious disorder for decades now. And after 30-plus years of her supporting my demanding and deeply gratifying career, it's time for me to focus the majority of my attention on her health.

Second only to my family, my involvement in Codexis has been the most rewarding endeavor of my life and the capstone of my 35-year career. I am incredibly proud to have had the opportunity to lead Codexis over this past decade. Codexis is stronger and better positioned than ever with an incredibly talented team in place, I am grateful to the entire Codexis team for their dedication, hard work and collaborative spirit and for helping us become such an exciting company to work for and with. We are only seeing the beginning of the long-term benefits that Codexis, its team and technology can bring to our world.

Our future is in excellent hands with Dr. Stephen Dilly. I've been thrilled to get to know Stephen as a member of Codexis' Board over these past two years. He is a proven leader with a successful two times CEO track record amongst many other significant accomplishments. He is uniquely poised to hit the ground running for Codexis, and I look forward to supporting Codexis' ongoing success as a continuing member of the Board and as a strategic advisor over the next few years.

Now I'll turn the call over to Stephen to say a few words.

Stephen Dilly

Good afternoon, everyone. First, I want to thank John for his leadership over the past decade. I look forward to building upon the strong foundation that he's laid. I know many of you are probably curious about my plans for Codexis' future. I plan to spend my initial months learning the core business from the inside as I continue formulating my broader vision for Codexis.

As a Board member over the past two years, I'm coming into this role, having participated actively in the company's exact strategic decisions, so you can expect continuity near-term. I'm honored that the board selected for this role and look forward to getting to know each of you months ahead. Back to you, John.

John Nicols

Thank you, Stephen. I have no doubt that the business will continue to flourish under your capable leadership. Now we'd be happy to take your questions. Operator?

Question-and-Answer Session


Thank you. We will now be conducting a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Brandon Couillard with Jefferies. Please proceed with your questions.

Unidentified Analyst

Thanks. This is Matt on for Brandon. And John, I just want to send you my best. It's been a pleasure working with you over the years. Maybe first one first, Stephen, I appreciate the comments there. Can you just talk about kind of high level, what attracted you to see that as the CEO knowing you've been on the board here for a few years? And then curious to get just some of your initial thoughts around what you see as some of the most exciting areas of the portfolio today. And then also your familiarity with the biotherapeutics pipeline and kind of philosophically how you're thinking about areas of -- that area of the business versus, the product side? Thanks.

Stephen Dilly

Yes, thanks. First of all, I'd actually say this is my fifth CEO role. So I'm a bit of a glutton for punishment. So it was really when John and I started talking about Codexis and his personal circumstances, I really did wish I could do something about it. And serendipity just played into our hands that allowed me to step in. And what was really exciting was looking at this core technology CodeEvolver at all the different ways that it can play out to add value.

And as you commented, one of the areas that I'm most familiar with is the Biotherapeutics pipeline, which I think is significantly underappreciated but also the ability to get into different parts of the value chain, for instance, pharmaceutical manufacturing. And when you look at an opportunity like this, the big question to ask is, how can I help? How is Dilly the right person to put into this role? And I think that partly it's because I've become familiar with the company as a Board member, and I'm in a good position to maintain some continuity. But also I'm a bit complementary in my skill sets. I'm much more thinking from a market focus. I'm much more thinking about the drug product at the end of the process rather than the enzyme at the start of the process.

So I think there's a lot of ways that the mind meld and thank goodness, John's going to be around as an advisor through at least the medium-term future. We can really synergistically add value. So I couldn't be more excited than I am right now.

Unidentified Analyst

Thanks. That's helpful. And then on the pipeline, another nice year, growth year on the commercial side adding five products versus last year. Can you just talk a little bit about where some of those newer programs are in their ramps? Are they all contributing meaningful revenues to Codexis today and kind of where those could go over the next year or two? Thank you.

John Nicols

Yes, hey, thanks Matt. This is John. First, thanks for your nice comments in the beginning. I really appreciate it. Yes, the pipeline -- the momentum in the pipeline continues to be very exciting for Codexis. Once again, 20% plus growth in the number of pipeline assets and nicely spread across the entire set of sectors that we've been building up at Codexis. Many of these are very early, these commercial products at 22 commercial products are very early in their market adoption, especially in the food and life sciences area. And just to highlight, I look back four years ago at our pipeline snapshot and you guys could do that, too. We had only one commercial product in the food space. Today, we have three. We had zero commercialized products in the life science area. Today, we have five.

Clearly, these are very, very early in their commercial adoption. So there's a lot of headroom for revenue growth, especially in these newer market areas like food and life sciences. But it's also exciting to see the traction and the sustained success that we've had building commercial successes out of our pharmaceutical manufacturing pipeline. Similarly, looked back at the numbers four years ago, we only had two commercialized products back then. The story of JANUVIA, which we've been talking about for many years, plus only one other in the patented arena. And most of our business development has been focusing on getting Codexis enzymes installed in clinical stage programs. At that time, four years ago, we had 14 Phase 2, Phase 3 installations.

Of those 14, seven of those have had turned into commercial products. And that's despite the reality that many, many Phase 2, Phase 3 programs do not advance to full approvals with the FDA. So really exciting to see the traction and the build-out of what used to be only three commercial products in those sectors to now -- not including the generic space now 17. So it's really working. It's really working well, and there's a lot of headroom for revenue growth from these fairly recently commercialized installations.

Unidentified Analyst

Super, I will leave it there. Thank you.

John Nicols

Thanks, Matt.


Thank you. Our next question come from the line of Steven Mah with Cowen. Please proceed with your questions.

Steven Mah

Great, thanks for the questions. And a warm welcome to Stephen and John, best wishes to you and your family.

John Nicols

Thanks from both of us.

Steven Mah

All right, two questions on the Life Science tools enzyme business. One, can you update us on the Roche T4 DNA-Ligase license agreement? And the second part, can you give us any color on the size of the Molecular Assemblies milestone payment, expected demand from Molecular Assemblies and remind us of the margin profile of this optimized TdT enzyme. And the reason I ask that is that given that it was such a tour to force to engineer the TdT enzyme or margins or are you going to be charging more because of that versus other life science tools enzymes?

John Nicols

Yes, Cole, great question. So first on your first question was about progress with Roche, our T4 DNA ligase for next-gen sequencing library prep. So several years ago, we transferred the technology to Roche. And through the pandemic, they've been building up their capabilities to manufacture that enzyme in-house. And they've been installing it into next-generation library prep kits. So really, they've been working downstream to get their products to have our T4 DNA ligase installed. So not a lot to report.

Just to refresh everybody's memory, given that we've enabled Roche to be able to manufacture the enzyme, our ultimate revenues will show up in the form of royalties on their product sales, not our product sales. So stay tuned for more progress as Roche continues to work downstream to Boost their library prep using our DNA ligase.

Yes, thanks for highlighting and asking a question on the Molecular Assemblies partnership. We're super excited about the progress, both that we've done and our partner Molecular Assemblies has done. We put out a press release just a couple of days ago that showed that we've notched off another key milestone to enable Molecular Assemblies to commercially launch their oligonucleotide and gene synthesis into the market, which that press release says they expect next year, which is great.

We finalized the way we're supplying the enzyme and to cut to the chase pretty quick. We expect at least a typical gross margin on those product sales probably enhanced. And we have to be careful because really, the pricing for this product, we don't want to overprice it and affect their cost of goods, making oligonucleotides that would be something that would get in the way of their ability to commercialize downstream. So we've landed on a really good model. We're going to charge a very fair price for the enzyme product supply. We're also -- I noted in the prepared remarks that the agreement allows us to generate royalties on their product sales. And those are modest low single-digit royalties.

But then also, we're as the second largest shareholder, we're set up to benefit from their downstream success, which we're very encouraged and hopeful and we're supporting them to do so. Leveraging this, like you said, I appreciate your phrase toward the force effort to create the world's best TdT enzyme, which they have accessed in this agreement exclusively to enhance their competitiveness. So really a terrific set of developments, and we look forward to sharing how well they're doing. And of course, they'll do that as well over time.

Steven Mah

Got it. And then any color on the milestone payments from Molecular Assemblies like the timing of revenue recognition of that and magnitude?

John Nicols

The milestones opportunities that I referred to in my prepared remarks are forward-looking possible milestones. So I think we'll just wait to share those news as they unfold. There's no -- I think maybe Ross can speak to any kind of milestone R&D revenue that's -- that we've generated from the consummation of this commercial supply agreement.

Ross Taylor

Yes, Steve, it's Ross. Yes, you may see us record one milestone here in the back half of the year that might be in the neighborhood of seven digits, but we'll report on that later.

Steven Mah

Okay. I appreciate it. And then my last question, it's going to be on PAXLOVID. I listened to the Pfizer earnings call, and they called out that they improved the manufacturing process for PAXLOVID reducing the lead time, improving the yield. So they don't need as much API to produce the same amount of finished goods.

My question is, was this the reason that they pulled back on the PAXLOVID manufacturing enzyme orders? And are you a victim of your own success in optimizing enzymes so well? And could this potentially happen with any of your existing or future API manufacturing partners? I'm thinking about JANUVIA or the generic Sitagliptin players you're talking to. How should we think about any sort of risk around that, if any.

John Nicols

Yes, I'll jump in. We can't speak for Pfizer. We saw in the transcript as well that they made -- they were asked the question about our enzyme agreement with them. And their answer was mostly about API manufacturing, not about enzymes. So I encourage you to look carefully at the words that they used in answering the question.

But we're not a victim of our own success here because we did not engineer this enzyme. This was an enzyme that was available off the shelf. And we provided it to them early in their development stage. And ultimately, as you know, got our enzyme installed in their manufacturing recipe, which has led to the significant, very significant sales that we're generating this year. So I think that's -- those are specific to your questions.

Steven Mah

Yes, okay. Yes, thanks for clarifying that. Okay, thanks. I don't have anything else.

John Nicols

Okay, thanks Steve.


Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Matt Hewitt with Craig-Hallum. Please proceed with your questions.

Matthew Hewitt

Good afternoon. And just to reiterate what the others have said. John, it's been a pleasure working with you the last few years, and welcome, Stephen. We look forward to working with you as well. Maybe first up, given the current inflationary environment, the success that you've had with Pfizer and others, I'm just curious if you're seeing more interest, more demand for your enzymes as a result, because of the cost reductions that you can make and bringing products to market faster through your enzymes?

John Nicols

Yes, I think we continue to have nice wins in our sales on adoption for manufacturing processes. Inflationary pressures definitely put more attention to supply chain efficiencies for our customers and enzymes are a great tool to reduce cost, sometimes in a stepwise fashion. Also, I'd highlight that our success story with Pfizer on PAXLOVID has highlighted just how quickly and to what magnitude Codexis' technology and products can generate that kind of value. And that's being noticed across the industry.

Finally, I'd just add that not only have we -- are we -- do we continue to work with all of the largest pharmaceutical companies. We continue to spread to smaller biotech companies to help them see the value that enzymes can bring to their manufacturing recipes. And I think that's having some fruit as well. All of it happens over time, but nice wins in our sales that will continue for the very, very medium and long-term that we continue to exploit here.

Matthew Hewitt

Got it. And then regarding the partnering kind of the shift that you talked about with your internal candidates, maybe shifting more towards partnering a little bit earlier. Is that something that you anticipate happening here in the back half of the year? Or is it a function of kind of needing to build up the interested parties, and so it's more of a '23 event?

John Nicols

Yes, I think that takes time. You can see our first half R&D revenues were just north of $8 million. Ross shared our full-year outlook is $20 million to $25 million. So clearly, we expect some lift in the second half versus the first half. But I think our efforts, as we shifted earlier in the year as the macro and capital market environment started to impact the way we pull and use all the levers that we have to grow as a company. We're going to really be building that R&D revenue wave more next year versus the short run, like in the next five months.

So look for us to build out the R&D revenues from where we land this year. Obviously, a key question for us, a key focus for us is driving the outlook for 2023. Not only do we expect to deliver on a nice sizable year-on-year growth next year in R&D revenues. We just have a terrific momentum in product sales, excluding Pfizer that we're very encouraged about, and we're driving double-digit sales from roughly 36 ex-Pfizer last year to 40, maybe more this year as we finish this year. We've had a five-year compounded growth rate in product sales before the Pfizer opportunity ever happened of 22%.

We've reported -- we shared all this momentum in our pipeline, the first question from Matt at Jefferies. We've just brought a lot of new commercial products on stream over these last few years, and they're very early in their revenue ramps. So we're very encouraged about all these growth drivers for 2023 and beyond. That encourages us to continue to drive medium and long-term growth as a company.

Matthew Hewitt

That's great. And if I could sneak one more in regarding Molecular Assemblies. You guys have been fairly public as far as your relationship and you buying in, your ownership of the company. And I'm curious if you have started to develop a pipeline of potential candidates, has Molecular Assemblies had customers reaching out even before this contract was formalized, wanting to be first movers to use the product as it became available.

John Nicols

Yes, yes and that's actually a key component of Molecular Assemblies as press releases recently, also highlighted in the press release that we co-issued earlier this week. They're putting forward now that they are finalizing their pilot manufacturing capabilities, they're putting forward what they call, I think, the key customer campaign to tap into the early interest from many different parties in many different DNA synthesis marketplaces. So that's really the key focus for them is to validate with real customers, their ability to generate longer strands of high-quality DNA quicker than traditional approaches.

Matthew Hewitt

Got it, thank you.

John Nicols

Thank you, Matt.


Thank you. Our final question will come from the line of R.K with H.C. Wainwright. Please proceed with your questions.

Ramakanth Swayampakula

Thank you. John, it's been a great pleasure and also really appreciate how you've grown Codexis from where it was, I believe, about six years ago when I first met you at the 2015 JPM. Good luck. And I very much hope and wish your wife and yourself good health.

John Nicols

Thank you.

Ramakanth Swayampakula

Welcome aboard, Stephen. So I have a couple of quick questions. One is on the relationship that you have been building with some of these generic companies that are planning to manufacture Sitagliptin. When it's said and done, would the revenue run rate be similar to what you have been achieving with the branded JANUVIA?

John Nicols

Yes, do you want to take one at a time, R.K.? Do you want to add to that question.

Ramakanth Swayampakula

Okay. So that is -- the second one is on Tate & Lyle. Just trying to understand our lease out, if the relationship is going to get any deeper beyond the Stevia that you have had for a while now.

John Nicols

Yes, let me take those in turn. We've provided some really terrific qualitative update on our progress to get our enzymes installed in generic Sitagliptin processes. Noting that today, the market is still under Merck's exclusive domain worldwide. So it's a positioning of many generic companies to ultimately enter what will become a large generic market. And we announced last year that we had established a generic partnership with an Indian company named Almelo, and that's been advancing.

But we -- today, we announced that we have four other supply agreements. These are substantial agreements with four other leading generic companies that we've put in place to date. And we've had a tremendous amount of sampling activity. So we expect additional agreements with other generic companies as well. So really getting our enzymes installed into tomorrow's ultimate generic market, which is very encouraging. This is critical for us to be able to try to maintain or maybe even grow our sales in that generic market versus what we've been doing with Merck. So I can't really answer -- we can't really answer at this point what kind of revenue run rate we're going to have with generic companies as compared to Merck. We have to wait until that generic market unfolds in the coming future.

Tate & Lyle has been a tremendous partnership. Not only do we have one of our commercial enzymes installed in the manufacture of the better-tasting Stevia product with, which Tate & Lyle has launched and is growing and is buying more and more of our enzyme for. But we also have commercial enzyme installed in another one of Tate & Lyle's recently launched sweeteners. It's a product called DOLCIA PRIMA and it's a more bulky kind of sweetener, it's also low caloric, not non-caloric, which is also growing.

So both of these commercial enzyme installations with Tate & Lyle are doing well. We continue to showcase that quarter-to-quarter. Our revenues are growing to Tate & Lyle and more broadly in the food space. So given the success that we've had with Tate & Lyle, we continue to have many discussions with Tate & Lyle, and I'm hopeful that we can showcase other commercial breakthroughs beyond these two with Tate & Lyle over time.

Ramakanth Swayampakula

Thank you. Thank you for taking the questions and good luck.

John Nicols

Thank you too, R.K.


Thank you. We have reached the end of our question-and-answer session. I'll now turn the call back over to John Nicols for any closing remarks.

John Nicols

Yes, thank you, everybody again, for joining us today. We look forward to continuing to update you on our progress, as Stephen takes the helm of the company. Have a great evening.


Thank you. This does conclude today's teleconference. We appreciate your participation. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Sun, 07 Aug 2022 00:00:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Tucker Carlson: Western governments rarely fight back when George Soros interferes No result found, try new keyword!Tucker Carlson exposes the influence liberal billionaire George Soros has over governments worldwide and his apparent attempt to destroy the U.S. justice system. Thu, 04 Aug 2022 15:27:21 -0500 en-us text/html Killexams : Tax Cases Monthly Round-Up: July 2022

Supreme Court

Case Title: Commissioner of Customs And Central Excise, Amritsar (Punjab) v. M/s. D.L. Steels Etc. Civil Appeal Nos. 2360-2376 of 2009

The Supreme Court held that 'anardana' or dried pomegranate seeds would fall under Heading 1209 of the Tariff entries issued under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as classified by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, attracting a custom duty at the rate of 5%, till the Revenue takes a considered policy decision regarding its classification.

The issue before the Bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi was that revenue authorities (appellant) asserted that 'anardana' falls under the Heading 0813 of the Tariff entries, and would incur custom duty at the rate of 30%, while the importers claimed that it is covered by Heading 1209 and attracts duty at the rate of 5%.

Case Title : Union of India vs. M/s Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 628

In a relief to several assessees who missed the statutory deadline, the Supreme Court has directed the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to allow a 2-month additional window from September 1, 2022 to October 31, 2022 for claiming Transitional Credit.

TRAN-1 and TRAN-forms were brought to allow assessees to carry forward pre-GST credits to the GST system. As per the GST Rules, such claims had to be filed within 90 days from the date when the GST Act came into force (July 1, 2017). Different High Courts passed directions for extending the timeline, against which the GST department approached the Supreme Court.

Delhi High Court

Case Title: Gulati Enterprises versus Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 604

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that a voluntary statement made before the revenue authorities cannot substitute a statutory pre-show cause consultation notice, as contemplated under Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, as it stood before 15.10.2020.

The Division Bench of Justices Rajiv Shakdher and Tara Vitasta Ganju dismissed the contentions of the revenue department that because the petitioner's authorized representative gave a voluntary statement before the concerned officer, the need for issuing a pre-show cause consultation notice was waived.

Case Title: ACME Heergarh Powertech Private Limited vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Anr.

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju issued notice and restrained the customs officer from taking any coercive action against the petitioners assailing the legality of Board Instruction No. 13/2022 dated 9.07.2022. The instruction was issued by the CBIC with regards to the inapplicability of the Manufacturing and Other Operations in Warehouse (no. 2) Regulations, 2019 (MOOWR Scheme) on solar power generating units.

Case Title: ACME Heergarh Powertech Private Limited vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Anr.

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Vitasta Ganju has stayed the show cause notice issued by the commissioner to revoke the licence under the Manufacturing and Other Operations in Warehouse (no. 2) Regulations, 2019 (MOOWR).

Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that by virtue of section 129E of the Customs Act, the right to appeal is a conditional right. The legislature, in its wisdom, has imposed a condition of deposit of a percentage of duty demanded or penalty levied or both.

The three-judge bench of Justice R.D. Dhanuka, Justice Nitin W. Sambre, and Justice Abhay Ahuja has observed that the fiscal legislation can very well stipulate as a requirement of law a mandatory pre-deposit as a condition precedent for an appeal to be entertained by the appellate authority. Thus, section 129E of the Customs Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional.

Case Title: Vodafone Idea Limited versus UOI and Ors.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the international Inbound Roaming Services (IIR) and the International Long Distance (ILD) Services provided by Vodafone Idea to Foreign Telecom Operators (FTOs) is an export of services, and thus, Vodafone Idea is eligible for the refund of the IGST paid by it.

The Bench, consisting of Justices K. R. Shriram and Milind N. Jadhav, observed that Vodafone Idea had entered into agreements with the FTOs and that there was no mention of any agreement with the subscribers of the FTOs. Hence, the Court ruled that the subscribers of the FTO cannot be considered as the recipient of the services and that the said services rendered by Vodafone Idea were supplied to the FTOs.

Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Anantham Retail Private Limited Versus State Tax Officer

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 283

Case Title: M/s. Redington (India) Limited versus Principal Additional Director General

The Madras High Court has ruled that officers of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) are "Central Excise Officers" for the purpose of Rule 3 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 since they are vested with the powers of Central Excise Officers by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC).

The Single Bench of Justice C. Saravanan, while considering a bunch of writ petitions, held that that the definition of "Central Excise Officer" in Section 2(b) of Central Excise Act, 1944 is expansive and that any person, including an officer of the State Government, who is invested by the CBEC with any of the powers of a Central Excise Officer under the Central Excise Act, is a "Central Excise Officer".

Case Title: The Assistant Commissioner of Customs - Imports, Custom House Versus M/s. Mahadev Enterprises

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 286

The Madras High Court bench of Justice S.S. Sundar and Justice S.Srimathy has allowed the re-exportation of betelnut products subject to the execution of a bond to cover the value of the goods.

Case Title: Sridhar Versus The Superintendent of GST

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 287

The Madras High Court has dismissed the petition alleging harassment by the GST department.

The single bench of Justice N. Sathish Kumar has observed that the term "harassment" is so subjective that it cannot be encapsulated in an objective criterion. The petitioner, having given a complaint, is bound to cooperate with the police for an inquiry.

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Anitha Sumanth has quashed the non-speaking order rejecting the GST registration application.

The petitioner had made an application seeking registration in accordance with Section 22 read with Section 25 of the CGST Act and Rule 8 of the CGST Rules. The registration sought was in respect of a rice mandi. The receipt of the application was duly acknowledged and physical verification (pv) was also duly undertaken.

Case Title: M/s.Gharpure Engg. & Construction (Pvt) Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 324

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Anitha Sumnath has quashed the VAT assessment and directed the department to follow the procedure set out in the circular regarding the issue of mismatch.

Karnataka High Court

Case Title: Commissioner of Central Tax Vs ABB Limited

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 245

The Karnataka High Court bench of Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice Anant Ramanath Hedge has held that the assessee is not liable for the suppression of facts as the show cause notice was issued on the basis of the disclosures made in the balance sheet.

Case Title: M/s Bellatrix Consultancy Services Versus The Commissioner of Central Tax

The Karnataka High Court bench of Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Justice Anant Ramanath Hedge has held that the limitation period is not applicable to a refund of service tax wrongly paid.

Case Title: M/s. D.P.J. Bidar-Chincholi (Annuity) Road Project Pvt Ltd.

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect and Customs (CBIC) clarifying that GST is not exempt on the annuity (deferred payments) paid for the construction of roads and allowed the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner.

The single bench of Justice M.I. Arun observed that a circular which clarifies the notification cannot have the effect of overruling the notification.

Calcutta High Court

Case Title: Suraj Singh Vs. Assistant Commissioner

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has held that an order passed without granting a personal hearing violates principles of natural justice.

Case Title: Ramesh Kumar Patodia versus Citi Bank Na and Ors.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that the interest component of the Equated Monthly Instalments (EMIs) of a loan advanced by a bank on a credit card is not exempt from IGST.

The Single Bench of Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya held that the services rendered by the bank by way of extending loans amounted to credit card services and hence, the interest component of the EMI of the said loan was interest involved in credit card services, which is excluded from the exemption conferred under Notification No. 9/2017 - Integrated Tax (Rate), dated June 28, 2017.

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Vasavi Wedding And Event Planners Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (AP) 95

The Andhra Pradesh High Court, while considering a petition challenging GST demand based on events posted on social media, held that information available on the social media platform of the petitioner shows that the event was conducted.

The division bench of Justice C. Praveen Kumar and Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao dismissed the petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority.

Telangana High Court

Case Title: M/s Ani Technologies Private Limited Versus State of Telangana

The Telangana High Court ruled that, while the department referred to Section12(9) of the IGST Act, the department erroneously recorded that, in the instance of an unregistered receiver, the place of supply should be the recipient's location. It prima facie appears to be in contravention of Section 12(9) of the IGST Act.

The division bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surepalli Nanda said, "it is prima facie evident that if the passenger is not registered under GST and avails transportation service, by way of legal fiction, the place of supply would be the place where the passenger embarks or starts his journey."

Case Title: M/s. Sri Sri Engineering Works and others Versus The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Begumpet Division, Hyderabad, and others

The Telangana High Court has held that the Telangana Value Added Tax (Second Amendment) Act, 2017 is unconstitutional.

The division bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice P. Madhavi Devi has observed that the intention of Parliament in ushering in the GST regime through the Constitution Amendment Act, enactment of the CGST Act and simultaneous enactment of various State GST Acts by the State Legislatures was to avoid a multiplicity of taxes by subsuming those indirect taxes into a single tax called GST. However, the amendments brought in by the Second Amendment Act were wholly inconsistent with the scheme of the Constitution Amendment Act read with the CGST Act and the TGST Act.

Jharkhand High Court

Case Title: M/s. Juhi Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus The State of Jharkhand

The Jharkhand High Court held that the summary of show cause notice in Form DRC-01 is not a substitute for show cause notice under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act.

The division bench of Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Deepak Roshan has observed that though the petitioner submitted their concise reply, the respondent cannot take benefit of the action as a summary of show cause notice cannot be considered as a show cause notice as mandated under Section 74(1). It is well settled that there is no estoppel against statute, and a bonafide mistake or consent by the assessee cannot confer any jurisdiction upon the proper officer. The jurisdiction must flow from the statute itself. The rules of estoppel are the rules of equity, which have no role in matters of taxation.

Case Title: M/s Shyam Hardware Store Versus The State of Jharkhand

The Jharkhand High Court has held that the inspection report does not fulfil the ingredients of a proper show-cause notice; it amounts to a violation of principles of natural justice.

The division bench of Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Deepak Roshan has observed that the adjudication order is null and void in the eye of the law if it is passed without the issuance of proper show-cause notice.

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: PCIT Versus M/s J.M.J. Essential Oil Company

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (HP) 18

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that the cash sales accepted by the VAT department are not sufficient to hold that the cash sales were genuine.

The division bench of Justice Sabina and Justice Satyen Vaidya has held that the Assessing Officer was liable to independently look into the cash sales to come to a conclusion as to whether the said sales were genuine or not. The Assessing Officer, as well as the Appellate Authority, rightly gave the finding of fact that the cash sales put forth by the respondent were not genuine and that the respondent had introduced its unaccounted income in the garb of cash sales.

Orissa High Court

Case Title: M/s Atlas PVC Pipes Limited Versus State of Orissa

The Orissa High Court has held that the non-submission of a certified copy of the GST order appealed against within 7 days is a mere technical defect.

The division bench of Justice Krushna Ram Mohapatra and Justice Murahari Shri Raman has observed that on the altar of default in compliance of a procedural requirement, the merit of the matter on appeal cannot be sacrificed.

​​Case Title: M/s. Patel Brothers & Co., Sambalpur v. State of Odisha

The Orissa High Court has held that 'bidi' comes under the purview of "tobacco and tobacco products" as provided under Entry 16, Part I of the Schedule to the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999 ('OET Act'). A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Radha Krishna Pattanaik observed, "Although learned counsel for the Petitioner sought to contend that under Entry 31 'cigarette and lighter' is a separate item and therefore unless there is a separate entry for 'bidi' it would not be amenable to entry tax in terms of the OET Act, the Court is unable to agree with the above contention. The expression 'tobacco and tobacco products' is wide enough to include 'bidi'..."

Rajasthan High Court

Case Title: Kamal Chand Bothra Versus Union Of India

The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Narendra Singh Dhaddha has granted bail to the person accused of GST evasion of Rs. 8.64 crore. The court directed that the petitioner be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties of Rs.25,000 each.

Case Title: Baker Hughes Asia Pacific Limited Vs Union of India

The Rajasthan High Court has held that the GST circular dated 31.03.2020, repugnant to the parent legislation, cannot be applied to oust the legitimate claim for an accumulated ITC refund.

The division bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani has observed that the supplying dealer would be entitled to claim a refund of accumulated unutilised tax credit under Section 54 (3) (ii) of the CGST Act irrespective of the fact that the input and output supplies are the same by ignoring the circular dated 31.03.2020.

Case Title: Shree Basant Bhandar Int Udyog v. Union of India

The Rajasthan High Court has granted stay on recovery of GST on royalty paid by the Petitioners on mining activity.

The order comes in a bunch of writ petitions filed primarily involving the issue of permissibility of raising demand of GST on royalty. The petitioners in these petitions challenged the notifications whereby, royalty paid by them on mining activity is being subjected to GST and/or notices issued for alleged incriminating discrepancies in returns after scrutiny and analogous proceedings.

Case Title: Vinod Kumar Versus Commissioner Uttarakhand State GST and others

The Uttarakhand High Court has held that the cancellation of GST registration affects the right to livelihood and the writ petition is maintainable.

The division bench headed by the Acting Chief Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra and Justice Ramesh Chandra Khulbe has observed that the appellant is denied his right to livelihood because of the cancellation of his GST Registration number. He has no remedy to appeal. It shall be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution as the right to livelihood springs from the right to life as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Allahabad High Court

Case Title: M/S Ram Krishna Garg provider Versus State Of U.P. And 4 Others WRIT TAX No. - 1064 of 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 329

The Allahabad High Court has held that the show cause notice cancelling registration must indicate the reason and the mere mentioning of violation under the CGST Act is not sufficient.

The single bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh has observed that cancellation of registration has the most serious civil consequences. While Section 29(1) of the CGST Act provides for specific grounds for cancellation with effect from the date of the occurrence of certain events, Section 29(2) provides for harsher consequences, including cancellation of registration with a retrospective date. However, a registration may not be cancelled on the mere whims and fancies of the proper officer. It may be cancelled if the registered person contravenes any provision of the Act or Rule or if the person does not furnish returns for three tax periods consecutively or does not furnish returns for six months continuously. The registration can be cancelled if he does not commence business within six months of the grant of registration or he is found to have obtained registration by means of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts.


Case Title: Cadila Healthcare Ltd. versus C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-I

The Ahmedabad Bench of CESTAT has ruled that empty packaging material of cenvatable input is not liable for payment either as excise duty or as CENVAT credit under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

The Single Bench of Judicial Member Ramesh Nair held that the assessee was not liable to pay any amount on the clearance of the said empty drums.

Case Title: M/s T.S. Motors India Private Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Lucknow

The Allahabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that even when an assessee has suppressed facts, the extended period of limitation can be evoked only when "suppression" is shown to be wilful with intent to evade the payment of service tax.

The two-member bench headed by Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that the show cause notice merely mentions that the appellant suppressed the value of taxable service. The show cause notice does not mention that the suppression was with the intention of evading payment of service tax.

Case Title: Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T.

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the limitation period is not applicable on personal ledger accounts (PLA).

The bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) has observed that in the case of PLA balance, it is not deposited as a duty but it is deposited as an advance towards the duty. The PLA amount takes the colour of excise duty only when it is utilised for payment of duty on clearance of excisable goods. The unspent balance of the PLA is only an advance, not a duty. Therefore, Section 11B is not applicable.

Case Title: Janki Dass Rice Mills Versus C.C.-Mundra

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Tribunal (CESTAT) has ruled that the exporter is not responsible for the instructions given by the importer regarding the change in the port after the issuance of a "Let Export Order" by the customs authority.

The two-member bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that the appellant lost the ownership of the goods as soon as the "let export order" was issued by the Customs authorities. After the export order, it was the responsibility of the shipping lines to ship the goods to the foreign buyer, with the exporter having no control over the goods. Hence, the appellant cannot be held responsible if the importer situated in Iran had given instruction to change the port from Bandar Abbas port to Jabel Ali port. After the "let export order" was issued by the Customs authorities, it was the importer in Iran who became the owner of the goods.

Case Title: Candila Healthcare Ltd. Versus C.C.E. & S.T.-VADODARA-I

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) has held that empty packaging material of cenvatable input is not liable for payment either as excise duty or as cenvat credit under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Case Title: NITCO Limited Versus C.C.E. & S.T.-DAMAN

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) has held that the C & F Agent Service is an admissible input service in the terms of Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Case Title: M/s. Geodis Overseas Private Limited Versus The Commissioner of Service Tax

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of Sulekha Beevi C.S. (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has held that the ocean freight charges collected from customers are not subject to the levy of Service Tax under Business Support Services.

Case Title: M/s Shiv Naresh Sports Pvt. Ltd. versus Commissioner, Service Tax, Delhi

The CESTAT Delhi has ruled that an activity undertaken in a stadium, which belongs to the Government and which is used for non-commercial activities, would not be covered under the definition of 'Commercial or Industrial Construction' services, as defined in Section 65 (25b) of the Finance Act, 1994, and hence, it would not attract service tax.

The Bench, consisting of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Mr. Raju (Technical Member), held that the activity of laying Synthetic Athletic Track Surface is of a civil nature and therefore, it would fall within the definition of commercial or industrial construction services; however, since the same was provided in respect of a sport facilities owned by the Government, the same would not be chargeable to service tax.

Case Title: M/s. ITCO Industries Ltd. versus The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise

The Chennai Bench of CESTAT has allowed credit of CVD and SAD paid after 30.06.2017 for the imports made prior to 30.06.2017, i.e., prior to the GST regime, under the advance authorisation scheme.

The Single Bench of Judicial Member Ms. Sulekha Beevi held that credit of CVD and SAD paid by the importer could not be denied on the ground that the duties were paid by the appellant only after an intimation letter was issued to it. The CESTAT observed that the said intimation letter had not been issued by invoking any provisions of the Customs law or Excise law.

Case Title: M/s K K Spun India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Customs and Service Tax, Indore

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), consisting of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member), has allowed the cenvat credit on the capital goods, as their finished goods falling under CTH 68109990 are dutiable under the Central Excise Tariff Act.

Case Title: M/s Leather Sellers Versus Commissioner of Customs And Excise, Patparganj

The Delhi Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the amount was lying in the nature of the pre-deposit with the department from the date of encashment of the bank guarantee.

The bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) has observed that the appellant is entitled to 12% interest from the date of encashment of the bank certain under Section 129EE of the Customs Act.

Case Title: M/s Amba River Coke Ltd. Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)

The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has allowed the benefit of exemption from payment of countervailing duty (CVD) on the grounds that the process of crushing and screening of iron ore is classified as iron ore fines.

The two-member bench headed by Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and C.J. Mathew (Technical Member) has held that iron ore concentrate refers to an ore that has been subjected to special processes for removal of all or part of the foreign matter, i.e., gangue contained in the ore, with which it naturally occurs.

Case Title: M/s Star CHA Management Services LLP Versus Commissioner of Customs, (Airport & General)

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed the order of forfeiture of security deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs but sustained the penalty of Rs. 50,000 on the Customs Broker.

The two-member bench headed by Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that the forfeiture of security deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs and imposition of a penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2018 is excessive.

Case Title: Commissioner of Central Excise And Customs, Central Goods And Service Tax Versus M/s Shree Cement Ltd

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has allowed the Cenvat credit of 2% CVD paid on the import of steam coal.

Case Title: M/s Anglo Eastern Maritime Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of CGST

The Mumbai bench of the Customs, Excise and Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) has held that a seafarer's recruitment service provider, who processes the entire selection, medical test, insurance, transportation, training, etc. to the overseas client and receives convertible foreign exchange, is not an intermediary.

Case Title: M/s. VITP Private Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad-IV

The Hyderabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the service tax is not applicable on reimbursement of expenses from its customers on account of water, electricity, and diesel expenses incurred for the provision of services.

The two-member bench of P.K. Chaudhary (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that cenvat credit can be availed on work contract services and other services for the construction of immovable property. The Cenvat credit can be availed for event management services for the promotion of business.


Applicant's Name: Rohit Singh Kharwar

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling consisting of Brajesh Kumar Singh and Joyjit Banik has ruled that a three-wheeled electrically operated vehicle, commonly known as an e-rickshaw, when supplied without a battery, is classifiable as an "electrically operated motor vehicle" under HSN 8703.

Applicant's Name: Srinivas Waste Management Services Private Limited

The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that contracts with municipalities towards supply of solid waste management, except Bio-CNG carried on at the Central Asphaltic Plant for the Greater Chennai Corporation, are exempted from GST.

The two-member bench of G. Venkatesh and K. Latha has ruled that contracts entered into with various city corporations and municipalities towards the supply of pure services towards the removal of legacy waste dumped at dump sites through the bio-mining process are exempted from GST.

Toll Charges Are IncludedIn The Value Of Outward Supply: Tamil Nadu AAR

Applicant's Name: NTL India Private Limited

The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) consisting of T.G.Venkatesh and K.Latha has ruled that the value of toll charges, being incidental expenses incurred while providing outward supply, is liable to be included in the value of outward supply of service.

Applicant's Name: Rohit Singh Kharwar

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling consisting of Brajesh Kumar Singh and Joyjit Banik has ruled that a three-wheeled electrically operated vehicle, commonly known as an e-rickshaw, when supplied without a battery, is classifiable as an "electrically operated motor vehicle" under HSN 8703.

Applicant's Name: Sri Vinayaka Hatcheries

The Andhra Pradesh Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR), consisting of D. Ramesh and RV Pradhamesh Bhanu, has ruled that 18% GST is payable on the rental of land for fish or prawn farming as the purpose of use of land was not mentioned in the lease agreement.

Applicant's Name: Universal Print System

The Andhra Pradesh Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that GST is not payable on the scanning and processing of results of examinations.

The two-member bench of D. Ramesh and RV Pradhamesh Bhanu has observed that the printing of pre-examination items like question papers, OMR sheets (Optical Mark Reading), and answer booklets for the conducting of an examination by the educational boards be treated as an exempted supply of service.

Applicant's Name: Be Well Hospitals

The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that the supply of medicines and consumables used in the course of providing health care services to outpatients admitted to the hospital for diagnosis, medical treatment, or procedures is not a composite supply. As a result, it is subject to GST.

The two-member bench of T.G.Venkatesh and K.Latha has ruled that the supply of medicines and consumables used in the course of providing health care services to in-patients admitted to the hospital for diagnosis, medical treatment, or procedures till discharge is a composite supply. It amounts to composite supply only when the consolidated bill raised in the name of the patient indicates the supply of medicines and consumables during the course of the provision of health care services. Hence, it is exempted from GST.

Applicant's Name: NSK Ship Management Private Limited

The Tamil Nadu Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) has ruled that the vessel support services provided in relation to foreign vessels sailing to other countries outside India fall under "export of services" as per Section 2(6) of the IGST Act, as the "place of supply" in such cases is entirely "outside India".

The two-member bench of T.G.Venkatesh and K.Latha has observed that if such vessels are calling at a port in India, then the Place of Supply in respect of that vessel is in India as per Section 13(6) of the IGST Act 2017 and the services rendered to that vessel are not an "export of service".

Applicant's Name: Myntra Designs Private Limited

The Karnataka Authority of Advance Ruling (AAR) consisting of M.P.Ravi Prasad and T.KIran Reddy has ruled that the sale of internet advertising space (except on commission) is eligible for 18% GST.


Appellant's Name: KPH Dream Cricket Private Limited

The Punjab Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR)has ruled that the GST is payable on the activity of providing free complimentary cricket match tickets. However, where complimentary tickets are being provided by the appellant to a related person or a distinct person, it shall fall within the ambit of supply on account of Schedule I and the appellant would be liable to pay tax.

The bench of Aruna Narayan Gupta and Kamal Kishor Yadav has observed that the appellant would not be eligible to avail input tax credit in relation to the activity of providing free complimentary cricket match tickets. However, if an activity or transaction is treated as a supply because it is provided by the appellant to a related or distinct person, the appellant is entitled to the input tax credit.

Applicant's Name: Deepak & Co.

The Delhi Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling (AAAR) has ruled that the GST rate on the supply of food and drinks, whether in trains or at platforms (static units), will attract 5% GST without an Input Tax Credit (ITC).

The two-member bench of Mallika Arya and Ankur Garg ruled that the supply of newspapers to passengers is exempt from GST.

Direct Tax

Supreme Court

Case Title: Principal Director Of Income Tax (Investigation) vs Laljibhai KanjiBhai Mandalia | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 592

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 592

The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered on Wednesday, restated the principles in exercising the writ jurisdiction in the matter of search and seizure under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act.

"The sufficiency or inadequacy of the reasons to believe recorded cannot be gone into while considering the validity of an act of authorization to conduct search and seizure", the bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian observed.

Delhi High Court

Case Title: Vipul Aggarwal versus Income Tax Office

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a person cannot be prosecuted for the offence under Section 276-CC (Failure to furnish returns of income) of the Income Tax Act, except with the previous sanction of the Principal Commissioner/appropriate authority.

A single judge bench of Justice Asha Menon held, "Since the law provides that without sanction u/s 278B of the IT Act, the Department cannot proceed against a person found liable to prosecute him for the offence under Section 276 CC of the IT Act, the present prosecution must fail qua the petitioner. In the absence of a specific sanction for prosecuting the petitioner, the learned ACMM could not have taken cognizance of the complaint against him and then framed charges against him. The edifice built without foundation must crumble."

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the Explanation to Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, added vide the Finance Act, 2022, cannot be presumed to be retrospective in nature since it is clarificatory in nature and alters the law as it stood earlier.

The Division Bench of Justices Manmohan and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc. versus CIT (2005), the amendment to Section 14A, which is "for removal of doubts", cannot be presumed to be retrospective, even if such a language is used, since it alters and changes the law as it prevailed before.

Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-I Versus Future First Info. Services Pvt. Ltd.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 696

The Delhi High Court has held that no disallowance under Section 40 (a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act is called for in the case of a short deduction of TDS and the correct course of action would have been to invoke Section 201 of the Income Tax Act.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has observed that disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) has to be based on cogent material or reasoning by the Assessing Officer.

Case Title: Celerity Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus Dy Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 73-1

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 706

The Delhi High Court has held that the tax payment software has to be tailor-made according to the needs, aspirations, and legal rights of the taxpayers and not that the taxpayers' legal rights have to be tailor-made in accordance with the software being used by the Tax Department.

The division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has held that as the petitioners have paid the taxes, they should be given credit for the challans paid on Form 3 under the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act (DTVSV Act). The order/communication rejecting credit of taxes deposited under the DTVSV on the hyper-technical ground that challans have been deposited under the minor head '200' instead of '400' is unfair, illegal, and contrary to the objective of enacting the DTVSV Act.

Case Title: SRF Ltd. versus Union of India

Citation: Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 714

The Delhi High Court has directed the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) to issue reports on the expenditure incurred by the assessee SRF Ltd. for the relevant assessment years in Form 3CL within six weeks.

The Division Bench of Justices Manmohan and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora observed that the DSIR is statutorily bound to issue the Form 3CL within 120 days in accordance with Rule 6(7A) (ba) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, certifying the expenditure incurred by the assessee on its in-house R&D units.

Bombay High Court

Case Title: The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- 4 Versus Kumar Builders Consortium

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 265

The Bombay High Court has upheld the order of the ITAT directing the Assessing Officer to work out the pro rata deduction under Section 80IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The division bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Abhay Ahuja has observed that Section 80IB(10) nowhere even remotely aims to deny the benefit of deduction in regard to a residential unit, which otherwise confirms the requirement of size at the cost of an ineligible residential unit with a built-up area of more than 1500 sq. ft.

Karnataka High Court

Case Title: M/s. D.P.J. Bidar-Chincholi (Annuity) Road Project Pvt Ltd.

The Karnataka High Court has quashed the circular issued by the Central Board of Indirect and Customs (CBIC) clarifying that GST is not exempt on the annuity (deferred payments) paid for the construction of roads and allowed the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner.

The single bench of Justice M.I. Arun observed that a circular which clarifies the notification cannot have the effect of overruling the notification.

Case Title: M/S. Flipkart Internet Private Limited versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation) and Ors.

The Karnataka High Courthas directed the Income Tax Department to issue a 'Nil Tax Deduction at Source' Certificate to Flipkart under Section 195(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with respect to the reimbursements made by it to Walmart Inc.

Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s. Dishnet Wireless Limited versus the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 278

The Madras High Court has ruled that proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 cannot dilute the rights of the Income Tax Department to reopen the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court noted that the Resolution Plan submitted by the assessee did not contemplate any concession from the Income Tax Department, even though notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued to the assessee prior to the submission of the Resolution Plan.

Case Title: Charu K. Bagadia Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-23(2), Mumbai

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 292

The Madras High Court invalidated the reassessment procedures on the basis that the reopening of the income tax assessment was conducted by an officer without jurisdiction.

The division bench of Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice J.Sathya Narayana Prasad has observed that the ACIT Mumbai, who recorded the reasons for reopening the assessment, has no jurisdiction over the appellant, to issue a notice dated 28.03.2018. Though the files pertaining to the reassessment proceedings of the appellant were transferred, the ACIT Chennai has no authority to continue the reassessment proceedings. Hence, the notice issued by him was also held to be invalid.

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Agrawal Petrolium Co. Vs PCIT

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Prakash Chandra Gupta has held that the reassessment order was passed without considering the reply to the show cause notice and directed the department to pass a fresh order.

Calcutta High Court

Case Title: PCIT Versus Sreeleathers

The Calcutta High Court has held that the income tax department cannot unreasonably reject proof submitted by the assessee.

The division bench of Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Bivas Pattanayak noted that the assessing officer brushed aside the explanation offered by the assessee by stating that merely filing PAN details and a balance sheet does not absolve the assessee from his responsibilities of proving the nature of transactions.

Case Title: Purulia Metal Casting Pvt. Ltd. Versus Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Purulia Charge & Ors.

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has held that the right to file a statutory appeal is mandatory before initiating any recovery proceeding.

Case Title: Maharaja Edifice Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors.

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice T.S. Shivagnanam and Justice Bivas Pattanayak has held that failure to furnish information based on which assessment was reopened is a violation of principles of natural justice.


Case Title: Essel Mining & Industries Limited Versus Dy. CIT

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that the sale of renewable energy certificates (carbon credit) of income received by the assessee is a capital receipt.

The two-member bench of Kuldip Singh (Judicial Member) and Gagan Goyal (Accountant Member) has observed that the sale of carbon credit could not be a business receipt or income, nor is it directly linked with the business of the assessee, nor any asset is generated in the course of business, but it is generated due to environmental concern.

Case Title: C. R. Dadhich Memorial Society Versus CIT(E)

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) consisting of Yogesh Kumar U.S. (Judicial Member) and B.R.R. Kumar (Accountant Member) has held that the assessee is eligible for registration under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act for imparting skill development, which is akin to providing education.

Case Title: Sasamusa sugar works pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT

The Kolkata Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), consisting of Aby T Varkey (Judicial Member) and Girish Agarwal (Accountant Member), has directed the assessing officer to allow the depreciation on molasses tanks by making the correct computation of new assets.

Case Title: DCIT versus M/s. Cummins Sales & Services (I) Ltd.

The Pune Bench of ITAT has ruled that the mere fact that the scheme of demerger or amalgamation was approved by the High Court, does not automatically entitle the assessee to claim the set-off of brought forward business losses relating to the demerged or amalgamating undertaking.

The Bench, consisting of S. S. Viswanethra Ravi (Judicial Member) and Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member), held that Section 72A (5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been enacted empowering the Assessing Officer to deny the benefit of set-off of brought forward business losses, and hence, merely because the scheme of demerger was approved by the High Court would not ipso facto entitle the assessee to the benefit of set-off, if the scheme was contrary to the objects behind the enactment of the provisions of Section 72A.

The Delhi Bench of ITAT has ruled that fees paid by the assesssee to a non-resident for providing services of introduction of clients would fall in the definition of payments made to an intermediary and the same cannot be said to be a technical service.

The Bench, consisting of Anubhav Sharma (Judicial Member) and Shamim Yahya (Accountant Member), held that the remittances made by the assessee to its intermediary for providing client referral services would not come within the scope of 'fees for technical services' (FTS) under Section 9(1)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and that the same was a normal business payment.

Case Title: The DCIT Versus M/s. Sidhanath Enterprise

The Rajkot Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), consisting of TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member) and Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), has ruled that the cash deposits related to the Shroff business are not an undisclosed income.

Case Title: Add. CIT Versus M/s Precision Bearing Pvt. Ltd.

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)has allowed the deduction and held that the expenditure incurred on trademark registration is a revenue expenditure.

The two-member bench of Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member) and B.M. Biyani (Accountant Member) has ruled that the amendment in section 32 of the Income Tax Act from A.Y. 1999-2000 which allows deprecation on various intangible assets (including trademarks) is applicable only when the cost incurred in respect of a trademark is in the nature of capital expenditure.

Case Title: Container Corporation of India Ltd. versus DCIT

The Delhi Bench of ITAT has ruled that the credit received by the assessee under the "Served From India Scheme" (SFIS) is not in the nature of income and that it does not constitute taxable income under Section 2(24) (xviii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The Bench, consisting of Yogesh Kumar US (Judicial Member) and Dr. B.R.R. Kumar (Accountant Member), observed that the SFIS credit had only reduced the value of a capital asset in the books of accounts of the assessee by the amount of excise duty and that if the SFIS credit was not available, the assessee would have paid the excise duty and added the same to the cost of the asset. Hence, the ITAT ruled that there was no element of revenue or income in the SFIS credit.

Case Title: EY Global Services Ltd. versus ACIT

The Delhi Bench of ITAT has directed the revenue authorities to give effect to the order passed by the Delhi High Court in favour of EY Global Services Limited (UK) (EYGSL (UK), holding that payments received by EYGSL (UK) from its member firms in India, towards Software License and Maintenance Charges, Global Technology Charges and GWAN Connectivity Charges, are not taxable in India.

The Bench, consisting of Astha Chandra (Judicial Member) and Shamim Yahya (Accountant Member), noted that the Delhi High Court, reversing the order passed by the AAR, has held that the payment received by EYGSL (UK) for providing access to computer software to its EY member firms located in India did not amount to 'Royalty' and hence, it was not taxable in India under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the India-UK DTAA.

Case Title: DCIT Versus M/s. Cummins Sales & Services (I) Ltd.

The Pune Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) consisting of S.S. Vishwanethra Ravi (Judicial Member) and Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member) has held that the benefit of section 72A of the Companies Act, 1956 cannot be availed if the sole idea of the amalgamation was only to avail the benefit of carried forward business losses and unabsorbed depreciation losses as it is not for genuine purpose.

Case Title: M/s. Bigfoot Retail Solution Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has deleted the disallowance on the grounds that the usage of telephone/internet is done for official purposes only.

The two-member bench of Astha Chandra (Judicial Member) and Anil Chaturvedi (Accountant Member) held that all telephones are either installed at office premises or used by officers and employees of the assessee company and usage of telephones and internet is done by employees for official purposes only. The expenses were incurred in the course of business of the assessee company and were not in the nature of personal expenditure.

Case Title: State Bank of India versus The Income Tax Officer

The Bangalore Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)has refused to condone the delay in filing the appeal on the grounds that even during the period of COVID-19, the ITAT was functioning and banking facilities were provided by the State Bank of India (SBI).

The two-member bench of George George K. (Judicial Member) and Laxmi Prasad Sahu (Accountant Member) has observed that the assessee must be well aware of the tax implications. It is the duty of the responsible officer to comply with the notices. The bank's books of accounts are audited by the CA along with the internal auditors. The assessee cannot escape by giving the reason merely as a change of branch manager.

Case Title: AGM Properties P. Ltd. Versus ACIT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that completed assessments could be interfered with by the AO while making an assessment under section 153A only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search. If in relation to any assessment year, no incriminating material was found, no addition or disallowance could be made in relation to that assessment year in the exercise of powers under section 153A of the Income Tax Act.

The two-member bench of Astha Chandra (Judicial Member) and Anil Chaturvedi (Accountant Member) has observed that the assessment for AY 2013-14 was already completed prior to the date of search. The scope of proceedings under section 153A had to be confined only to material found in the course of the search.

Case Title: Karamvir Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)consisting of Saktijit Dey (Judicial Member) and B.R.R. Kumar (Accountant Member) has held that the agricultural land purchased by the assessee in the name of his wife is not eligible for deduction under section 54B of the Income Tax Act.

Case Title: Srijal Gupta Versus Income Tax Officer of Income Tax Ward 6(3)

The Amritsar Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), consisting of Anikesh Banerjee (Judicial Member) and Dr. M. L. Meena (Accountant Member), has held that the cash deposit of a firm can not be added to the personal income of the partner without investigation.

The notice under section 148 of Income Tax Act was issued against the assessee on 15.03.2013. The assessee filed his return of income declaring the NIL income as there was no income and the assessee only purchased a property. The reasons were recorded by the AO.

Case Title: Avana Global FZCO versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The Mumbai Bench of ITAT has reiterated that the activity of Inland Haulage is directly connected with the transportation of goods in international traffic and thus, Inland Haulage Charges are not taxable as business profit in India in view of Article 8 of the India-UAE DTAA (Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement).

The Bench, consisting of Vikas Awasthy (Judicial Member) and Gagan Goyal (Accountant Member), held that since the activity of Inland Haulage was directly connected with the transportation of goods in international traffic, and since it was an integral part of operation of ships; hence, the Inland Haulage Charges cannot be disintegrated from profits derived from shipping business, as envisaged under Article 8 of the DTAA.

Case Title: Tata Medical Centre Trust versus Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption)

The Kolkata Bench of the ITAT has quashed the revisionary order passed by the Income Tax Authority without quoting the Document Identification No. (DIN) in the said order, as required by the CBDT Circular No.19/2019, dated 14.08.2019.

The Bench, consisting of Mr. Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member) and Mr. Girish Agrawal (Accountant Member), held that since the order passed by the Income Tax Authority failed to mention the DIN in its body, therefore, the said order was "invalid and deemed to have never been issued", as provided under the said CBDT Circular.

Case Title: Archana Sharma Versus DCIT

The Delhi Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that if a loan or advance is given to a shareholder as a consequence of any consideration which is beneficial to the company, in such a case, the advance or loan cannot be said to be a deemed dividend.

The two-member bench of Astha Chandra (Judicial Member) and Anil Chaturvedi (Accountant Member) has observed that a gratuitous loan or advance given by a company to the classes of shareholders would come within the purview of a deemed dividend under section 2(22) of the Income Tax Act.

Case Title: M/s. Sulzer Tech India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Addl./Jt./Dy./Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax

The Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has observed that the TPO was not justified in treating the value of international transactions "Payment of Corporate IT Support Services" as NIL.

The two-member bench headed by Pramod Kumar (Vice President) and Sandeep Singh Karhail (Judicial Member) has observed that no search was conducted to find out the independent entity in a comparable transaction and the arm's length price of the international transaction was treated to be Nil.

Case Title: Air India Ltd. versus Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi

The Mumbai Bench of ITAT has ruled that Air India must be given the benefit of the Proviso to Section 201 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence, it cannot be considered as an assessee in default for shortfall in deduction of TDS on the payments made by it to its subsidiary - Air India Engineering Services Ltd.

The Bench, consisting of Kavitha Rajagopal (Judicial Member) and Baskaran B.R. (Accountant Member), remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for examining the claim of Air India for availing the benefit of the Proviso to Section 201 (1), as per which an assessee shall not be treated as an assessee in default, if the conditions specified therein are complied with.

Case Title: Dilip B. Mundada Versus The Dy.CIT

The Pune Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that for availing the benefit of deduction under section 54F, the new asset shall be purchased in the name of the assessee.

The two-member bench of S.S.Godara (Judicial Member) and Dipak P. Ripote (Accountant Member) has observed that section 54F does not say that the assessee shall invest in the new house, but it says the assessee shall purchase a new house. The assessee claimed that the amount for the flat was invested by him. However, it was factually incorrect. As per the documents, the payments for the flat were made by his wife.

Mon, 01 Aug 2022 01:30:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Brokers Digest: Local Equities - Nova Wellness Group Bhd, UWC Bhd, Malaysian Resources Corp Bhd, Media Prima Bhd No result found, try new keyword!RM1.09 OUTPERFORM KENANGA RESEARCH (JULY 19): We initiate coverage on Nova Wellness Group with an “outperform” call and target price of RM1.09 based on 15 times CY2023 EPS. We like Nova for its: (i) ... Sun, 31 Jul 2022 18:30:00 -0500 en-my text/html Killexams : Norwegian Cruise Line signs new deal with Port Canaveral involving Escape, Getaway, Prima

Port Canaveral commissioners have unanimously approved a new two-year operating agreement with Norwegian Cruise Line that will bring more guaranteed revenue to the port.

The agreement guarantees a minimum of 45 home-port sailings a year by NCL out of Port Canaveral, as well as a minimum annual payment of "passenger use charge" fees of $3,375,000 in the first year and $3,499,425 in the second year.

The certain is nearly twice the minimum of 23 sailings a year under the previous agreement.

The Norwegian Escape is one of three Norwegian Cruise Line ships that will sail out of Port Canaveral during the next two years.

The new agreement allows NCL ships to conduct cruise operations primarily at Cruise Terminals 5 and 10.

The vessel schedule covers three seasonal home-port ships — the Norwegian Escape, Getaway and Prima — as well as certain port-of-call and affiliate ships.

Shift in plans: Norwegian Getaway ship drops planned Russian itinerary, to move to Port Canaveral in June

Joining the lineup: Norwegian Escape rejoins Port Canaveral cruise lineup, giving port record fifth brand

Port Canaveral Chief Executive Officer John Murray noted that the Getaway rejoined the port lineup on June 27, offering seven-night sailings.

"For a last-minute addition to the port, the ship is sailing very, very strong on passenger counts," operating at nearly 100% of its double-capacity occupancy, Murray said.

The Getaway previously had been scheduled to sail this summer out of a home-port of Copenhagen, Denmark, on a northern European itinerary that included a port-of-call stop in St. Petersburg, Russia. Norwegian changed its plans due to the Russia-Ukraine war.

"So we're really glad to have the ship back," Murray said. " And it looks like a successful summer for Norwegian Cruise Line."

As part of the port's deal with Norwegian, the cruise line will be charged an initial passenger use charge of $13.09 per passenger movement for its sailings. That payment will be in lieu of dockage, wharfage, line-handling and harbormaster fees. The passenger use charge is subject to adjustment annually on Oct. 1.

In discussing the port's deal with Norwegian, Murray said: "This new agreement is testament to the confidence Norwegian Cruise Line has in Port Canaveral. With great partners like Norwegian, the port continues to grow and invest in our future for the benefit our port community."

These are the sailing schedules of the three ships out of Port Canaveral, under the agreement:

Strengthening cruise business

Port Canaveral Chief Financial Officer Michael Poole said the port's overall cruise business continues to strengthen, with its home-ported ships now sailing at an average of 90% to more than 100% of their double-occupancy capacity. Ships can sail at more than 100% of double-occupancy capacity because cruise lines can book three or four passengers in some cabins.

In its 2021-22 budget projections, made last summer, the port had been projecting cruise ship passenger counts at 50% of double-occupancy capacity for October through December 2021. The port increase the figure to 75% of double-occupancy capacity for January through September 2022.

Poole said those targets were exceeded in October through December 2021; fell short in January through March 2022; then were exceeded in April and May 2022.

"Everybody is doing well right now," Murray said.

On Thursday, the new Disney Wish will have its first regular sailing out of Port Canaveral, offering three- and four-night sailings. The Wish is Disney's first cruise ship powered by liquefied natural gas.

Revenue projections exceeded

Poole said the port's combined revenue from cruise ships and cruise passenger parking was $59.89 million for the first eight months of the current budget year (October 2021 through May 2022). That's about $3.97 million over the projected budget amount.

Five cruise lines sail out of Port Canaveral — Carnival, Disney, MSC, Norwegian  and Royal Caribbean — using six cruise terminals.

"All of our cruise assets, all the terminals, they're being optimally used," Poole said.

The port's overall operating revenue — including revenue from cruise, cargo, leases, recreation and other business lines — totaled $78.55 million for the first eight months of the current budget year. That's $6.09 million above budget projections.

Poole said the port's profit — or "change in net position" — so far this year is $43.10 million.

The profits have been boosted largely by federal American Rescue Plan Act grant payments that have totaled $23.57 million so far this budget year, plus federal and state grants totaling $12.67 million related to a North Cargo Berth 3 project.

Dave Berman is business editor at FLORIDA TODAY. Contact Berman at Twitter: @bydaveberman.

Support local journalism and journalists like me. Subscribe today.

This article originally appeared on Florida Today: Norwegian deal with Port Canaveral details seasonal sailing by 3 ships

Tue, 12 Jul 2022 21:11:00 -0500 en-US text/html Killexams : Search, seizure at Limpopo Health office over multi-million rand PPE scandal ‘will bear fruit’

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

Tue, 19 Jul 2022 22:42:00 -0500 en-US text/html
8010 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List