Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
n-Hexane was classified as a separate chemically defined compound under Chapter 29 rather than as petroleum oil or motor spirit under Chapter 27. The Court held that the Revenue bore the burden of proving Chapter 27 classification and failed to show that the product satisfied all motor spirit conditions, including suitability for use as fuel in spark ignition engines. Applying Rule 3(a) of the General Rules of Interpretation, it preferred the more specific HSN description for hexane as an acyclic saturated hydrocarbon. It further found that manufacturing impurities did not convert the product into a mixture, and relied on the DGFT circular supporting Chapter 29 treatment. The Revenue's classification claim was rejected.
n-Hexane was classified as a separate chemically defined compound under Chapter 29 rather than as petroleum oil or motor spirit under Chapter 27. The Court held that the Revenue bore the burden of proving Chapter 27 classification and failed to show that the product satisfied all motor spirit conditions, including suitability for use as fuel in spark ignition engines. Applying Rule 3(a) of the General Rules of Interpretation, it preferred the more specific HSN description for hexane as an acyclic saturated hydrocarbon. It further found that manufacturing impurities did not convert the product into a mixture, and relied on the DGFT circular supporting Chapter 29 treatment. The Revenue's classification claim was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.