TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the demand of 10% under Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was sustainable on supplies made to an entity treated as a contractor instead of an SEZ developer.
Analysis: The demand was founded only on the premise that the recipient was not an SEZ developer. The letter from the Department of Commerce showed that the recipient was an SEZ developer. No material was produced to establish that the recipient was merely a contractor. In any event, the Tribunal's earlier view was followed that Rule 6 does not apply so as to fasten a 10% liability on goods supplied to an SEZ developer or its contractor for SEZ-related supplies.
Conclusion: The demand under Rule 6 was not sustainable and the assessee succeeded.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
