Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2701 to 2720 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
GI welded wire mesh cleared for poultry farms was held classifiable under heading 7314, because tariff classification turns on the goods as manufactured and cleared, not their later use in poultry cages; a wire mesh does not become poultry keeping machinery or a part of it merely by intended use. The excise demand was therefore sustained only for the normal period, as the classification dispute involved competing entries and no deliberate suppression or misclassification was proved, so the extended period, section 11AC penalty, Rule 25 penalty and confiscation were set aside. The Tribunal also upheld service tax on erection, commissioning and installation activity at poultry farm sites. Personal penalty on the partner under Rule 26 failed because there was no evidence that he knew or had reason to believe the goods were liable to confiscation.
GI welded wire mesh cleared for poultry farms was held classifiable under heading 7314, because tariff classification turns on the goods as manufactured and cleared, not their later use in poultry cages; a wire mesh does not become poultry keeping machinery or a part of it merely by intended use. The excise demand was therefore sustained only for the normal period, as the classification dispute involved competing entries and no deliberate suppression or misclassification was proved, so the extended period, section 11AC penalty, Rule 25 penalty and confiscation were set aside. The Tribunal also upheld service tax on erection, commissioning and installation activity at poultry farm sites. Personal penalty on the partner under Rule 26 failed because there was no evidence that he knew or had reason to believe the goods were liable to confiscation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.