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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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>Tribunal denies exemption claim due to filing delays, strict interpretation of rules</h1> <h3>M/s. Nalari Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Satyam Alloys, M/s. Jai Kamakhya Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Khasi Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Bimala Ispat & Alloys (P) Ltd. Versus Commr. of Central Excise, Shillong</h3> M/s. Nalari Ferro Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Satyam Alloys, M/s. Jai Kamakhya Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Khasi Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Bimala Ispat & Alloys (P) ... Issues Involved:1. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999.2. Condonation of delay in filing applications for exemption.3. Interpretation of statutory provisions and conditions of exemption notifications.4. Authority of the Commissioner to condone delays beyond the statutory limit.Detailed Analysis:1. Eligibility for Exemption under Notification No. 32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999:The appellants engaged in manufacturing excisable goods in the North-Eastern Region claimed the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 32/99-CE dated 08.07.1999. They filed applications with delays ranging from 82 to 176 days beyond the due date. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Shillong, rejected these applications on the grounds that they were not submitted by the stipulated date of 30th September of the respective financial year, nor within the condonable period of 30 days.2. Condonation of Delay in Filing Applications for Exemption:The appellants argued that the delay was due to the unavailability of the value addition certificate and balance sheet from the preceding financial year. They contended that the delay was unintentional and technical, and should have been condoned by the adjudicating authority. They cited various judgments to support their claim for condonation of delays.Conversely, the Revenue argued that the conditions of the Notification were specific and required strict compliance. The Commissioner could only condone delays up to 30 days beyond the due date, and any further delay was beyond his authority to condone.3. Interpretation of Statutory Provisions and Conditions of Exemption Notifications:The Tribunal emphasized the well-settled principle that exemption notifications must be strictly interpreted. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Meridian Indus. Ltd. and Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. reiterated that the onus lies on the appellant to prove that their case falls within the four corners of the notification. If there is any doubt or ambiguity, it should be resolved in favor of the Department.4. Authority of the Commissioner to Condon Delays Beyond the Statutory Limit:The Tribunal referred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Singh Enterprises, which clarified that statutory authorities cannot condone delays beyond the period explicitly allowed by the statute. The Commissioner has no power to condone delays beyond the additional 30 days stipulated in the Notification. This principle was further supported by the Bombay High Court's decision in Zenith Computers Ltd., which held that statutory bodies must act within the powers conferred by the statute.Conclusion:The Tribunal concluded that the appellants failed to comply with the conditions of the Notification by not submitting their applications within the stipulated time frame. Consequently, the benefit of the exemption could not be extended to them. The Tribunal upheld the orders of the adjudicating authority, dismissing the appeals filed by the appellants. The operative part of the order was pronounced in the open court.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found