Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Period of limitation - Relevant date - There is no dispute that the relevant date in the present case is 25.11.2012. Prior to this date on 28.05.2012, section 73(1) of the Finance Act was amended and it was provided that the Central Excise Officer could issue a notice within eighteen months from the relevant date. The show cause notice was issued on 08.05.2014, which would be within eighteen months from 25.11.2012 - Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, committed no illegality in holding that the demand for the period 01.04.2012 to 30.06.2012 was within the statutory period of eighteen months from the relevant date. - AT
Period of limitation - Relevant date - There is no dispute that the relevant date in the present case is 25.11.2012. Prior to this date on 28.05.2012, section 73(1) of the Finance Act was amended and it was provided that the Central Excise Officer could issue a notice within eighteen months from the relevant date. The show cause notice was issued on 08.05.2014, which would be within eighteen months from 25.11.2012 - Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, committed no illegality in holding that the demand for the period 01.04.2012 to 30.06.2012 was within the statutory period of eighteen months from the relevant date. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.