TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
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 exemption under Notification No. 52/78-CE could be denied in entirety merely because electricity generated for captive industrial use was also partly supplied to staff quarters and other ancillary purposes, and whether the matter required reconsideration after an effective personal hearing.
Analysis: The generating unit was put up primarily for the appellant's industrial requirements, and only a portion of the electricity was diverted to staff quarters and similar incidental uses. The rigid refusal to grant exemption on the whole generation, solely because exact segregation through meters was not available, was found unsatisfactory. A broad and reasonable apportionment of electricity for industrial and non-industrial use was considered possible on a pragmatic and common-sense approach. The absence of an effective opportunity of personal hearing before the adjudicating authority also weighed against the earlier decision.
Conclusion: The denial of exemption in toto was not sustained. The matter was sent back for fresh decision by the Assistant Collector with due regard to the Tribunal's observations and after giving the appellant an effective personal hearing.
Final Conclusion: The appellant obtained partial relief, as the earlier orders were set aside and the exemption claim was required to be reconsidered afresh on a reasonable and fair basis.
TaxTMI 
