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>President overturns order due to limitation issue, grants relief to appellant.</h1> <h3>SHAH ALLOYS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA</h3> SHAH ALLOYS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA - 2009 (235) E.L.T. 551 (Tri. - Ahmd.) Issues Involved:1. Legality of the show cause notice dated 13-11-2005.2. Interpretation of the EPCG scheme and Notification No. 55/2003.3. Alleged misdeclaration and suppression of facts by the appellant.4. Applicability of the extended period of limitation under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act.5. Imposition of penalties on the appellant and the Chartered Engineer.Detailed Analysis:1. Legality of the Show Cause Notice Dated 13-11-2005:The appellant argued that the issuance of the show cause notice dated 13-11-2005 was not legal since seven show cause notices on the same issue had already been issued in May 2005. The appellant contended that further proceedings were unjustified. However, the respondent maintained that the new notice was issued based on detailed investigations that brought new facts to light, justifying the issuance of the new show cause notice.2. Interpretation of the EPCG Scheme and Notification No. 55/2003:The EPCG scheme under Para 5.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2002-03 and Notification No. 55/2003 dated 1-4-2003 were to be viewed in an integrated fashion. The appellant claimed that the import of furnace oil as consumables was valid under the EPCG scheme, supported by certificates from a Chartered Engineer, and was used for generating electricity. However, the respondent argued that the term 'spares including Refractories and consumables' should be construed as consumable spares for capital goods and not include fuel. The Customs Notification No. 55/2003 did not permit fuel as consumables during the relevant period, and the subsequent amendment specifically permitting such import was not applicable retrospectively.3. Alleged Misdeclaration and Suppression of Facts by the Appellant:The appellant argued that there was no misdeclaration or suppression of facts as the import of furnace oil was clearly indicated in the application and supported by the Chartered Engineer's certificate. The respondent, however, contended that the appellant had furnished incorrect information, misleading the DGFT authorities. The Commissioner confirmed the demand of duty, stating that the fuel could not be considered as spares under Notification No. 55/2003 during the relevant period.4. Applicability of the Extended Period of Limitation Under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act:The imports were made during March-April 2004, and the show cause notice was issued on 30-11-2005. The appellant contended that the notice was time-barred as it was beyond the one-year limitation period and that the extended period of five years could not be invoked without evidence of suppression or misstatement. The Member (Judicial) agreed with the appellant, finding no suppression or misstatement justifying the invocation of the extended period. The Member (Technical) did not explicitly discuss the limitation issue but upheld the demand, implying rejection of the time-bar argument.5. Imposition of Penalties on the Appellant and the Chartered Engineer:The Commissioner imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,11,47,947/- on the appellant and Rs. 10,000/- on the Chartered Engineer. The Member (Technical) set aside the penalties, noting that the certificate and application clearly indicated the intended use of the fuel, and there was no evidence of mala fide intent. The Member (Judicial) also found no grounds for penalties, aligning with the view that there was no suppression or misstatement.Majority Decision:The President (Third Member) agreed with the Member (Judicial), concluding that the impugned order was unsustainable on the ground of limitation. The appeal was allowed, and the order of the Commissioner was set aside, providing consequential relief to the appellant.Final Order:The impugned order was set aside on the ground of limitation, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found