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 upholds tax demand against appellant claiming area-based exemption under Notification No. 50/2003</h1> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI confirmed a demand of Rs. 47,16,484 against the appellant for a specific period. The appellant, located in ... Duty demand - job worker - area based exemption - non filing of declaration - Notification No. 50/2003-C.E., dated 10-6-2003 read with Notification No. 76/2003-C.E. β Held that:- identical issue was the subject matter in the stay petition in the case of M/s. Shivam Enterprises vs. CCE Chandigarh [2012 (11) TMI 821 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] wherein it stand held that once the above option stand exercised by the appellant, the technical objection of proper application having been filed subsequently cannot stand in the way of grant of substantial benefit - Stay granted. The judgment by Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI confirmed a demand of Rs. 47,16,484 against the appellant for a specific period. The appellant, located in Uttarkhand, was entitled to area-based exemption under Notification No. 50/2003. Despite a delayed formal application, the tribunal granted the appellant the benefit of the notification based on previous decisions in similar cases.