1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Appellate Tribunal denies stay on Commissioner's order in tax case. Evidence insufficient for clandestine clearance.</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai rejected the application for stay of operation of the Commissioner (Appeals) order setting aside a demand of Rs. ... Stay of order The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai rejected the application for stay of operation of the Commissioner (Appeals) order setting aside a demand of Rs. 3,43,944 and Rs. 1,60,000. The Tribunal held that the evidence on record was not sufficient to establish clandestine clearance. The Tribunal stated that the correctness of the Commissioner (Appeals) order can only be considered when the appeal is finally heard. The prayer for stay was denied as there was no justification provided for granting stay.