Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CENVAT credit on MS scrap received under registered dealer invoices was admissible where valid invoices, banking payments, statutory records, transport-service tax and evidence of consumption supported receipt, while manufacture and clearance of finished goods remained undisputed. The Revenue had to prove non-receipt through affirmative evidence and identify an alternative raw-material source; suspicion and incomplete investigation were insufficient. Uncorroborated, contradictory investigation statements could not sustain denial without compliance with Section 9D safeguards. Limited Vahan portal vehicle discrepancies, without examination of vehicle owners or independent evidence, could not establish fictitious transactions. Extended limitation was unavailable because statutory returns and records disclosed the credit and no fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade duty was proved. Credit reversal, interest and penalties were set aside.
CENVAT credit on MS scrap received under registered dealer invoices was admissible where valid invoices, banking payments, statutory records, transport-service tax and evidence of consumption supported receipt, while manufacture and clearance of finished goods remained undisputed. The Revenue had to prove non-receipt through affirmative evidence and identify an alternative raw-material source; suspicion and incomplete investigation were insufficient. Uncorroborated, contradictory investigation statements could not sustain denial without compliance with Section 9D safeguards. Limited Vahan portal vehicle discrepancies, without examination of vehicle owners or independent evidence, could not establish fictitious transactions. Extended limitation was unavailable because statutory returns and records disclosed the credit and no fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade duty was proved. Credit reversal, interest and penalties were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.