Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Settlement Commission Ruling: Lack of Evidence, Duty Determination, and Immunity Granted</h1> <h3>IN RE: AGGARWAL JARDA FACTORY (P) LTD.</h3> The Settlement Commission found that the Revenue lacked corroborative evidence to support their case regarding alleged removal of finished products ... Settlement of case - Immunity from prosecution Issues Involved:1. Alleged removal of finished products without payment of Central Excise Duty.2. Dispute over the duty liability amount.3. Request for waiver of penalty, interest, and immunity from prosecution.4. Reliance on uncorroborated transporter documents and statements.5. Duplicate and cancelled entries in the Show Cause Notice.Detailed Analysis:1. Alleged Removal of Finished Products without Payment of Central Excise Duty:The Directorate General of Anti Evasion found that the company was removing finished products without documents and without paying Central Excise Duty. A Show Cause Notice was issued demanding a duty of Rs. 1,12,89,671.00 and proposing penalties under various rules and sections of the Central Excise Act, 1944.2. Dispute Over the Duty Liability Amount:The applicants admitted a duty liability of Rs. 81,23,921.00, having already deposited Rs. 65,00,000.00 with the Revenue. They disputed the remaining amount of Rs. 31,67,750.00, arguing that the Revenue's demand was based on transporter documents lacking material evidence such as the names of consignors or consignees and quantities.3. Request for Waiver of Penalty, Interest, and Immunity from Prosecution:The applicants requested the Settlement Commission to waive penalties, interest, and grant immunity from prosecution. They argued that they had made a true and complete disclosure of their duty liability and had cooperated fully with the proceedings.4. Reliance on Uncorroborated Transporter Documents and Statements:The Revenue's case relied heavily on the loading sheets recovered from M/s. Punjab Transport Co. and the statements of the transporter's partner, Shri Joginder Kumar, who claimed that the tobacco mentioned in the loading sheets belonged to the applicants. The applicants contended that these documents were uncorroborated and included goods from other parties, including 'Hukka Tobacco,' which they did not manufacture.5. Duplicate and Cancelled Entries in the Show Cause Notice:The Commissioner (Investigation) and the applicants pointed out that the Show Cause Notice included duplicate and cancelled entries, leading to an inflated duty demand. The Revenue admitted errors in 22 entries and accepted that a duty amount of Rs. 12,39,500.00 was not due, reducing the disputed liability to Rs. 19,26,000.00. The applicants further admitted a duty liability of Rs. 500.00 for one entry, leaving a balance-disputed liability of Rs. 19,25,500.00.Judgment:The Settlement Commission found that the Revenue did not have corroborative evidence such as Goods Receipts (GRs) to substantiate their case. The reliance on uncorroborated loading challans and the statement of Shri Joginder Kumar, without making him a co-noticee to the Show Cause Notice, was found insufficient. The Commission held that the uncorroborated loading challans could not be relied upon.The duty payable by the applicants was determined to be Rs. 81,23,921.00 plus Rs. 500.00, totaling Rs. 81,24,421.00. The applicants were directed to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 500.00 within 30 days. The Commission granted immunity from prosecution and penal liability under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Rules made thereunder, provided the applicants paid 10% simple interest on the duty evaded until the final payment. The applicants were required to submit a worksheet of the interest calculation, authenticated by the Revenue, and pay the full interest within 15 days of submitting the worksheet.Conclusion:The Settlement Commission concluded that the applicants had made a true and complete disclosure and had cooperated fully with the proceedings. Immunity from prosecution and penal liability was granted, and the applicants were directed to pay the balance duty and interest as calculated.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found