Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Exemption from Duty - Supply chain dynamics of food preparations intended for free distribution to economically weaker sections under a government-approved program - The tribunal found that the appellant's products were indeed eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-CE. It was determined that both the Complementary Weaning Food (CWF) and the Blend of Critical Processed Materials (BCPM) manufactured by the appellant were intended for free distribution to beneficiaries under the ICDS scheme, fulfilling the criteria laid down in the notification. - The tribunal also addressed the invocation of the extended period for the demand of duties. It concluded that there was no suppression of facts by the appellant that warranted such invocation, making the demand unsustainable on limitation grounds as well.
Exemption from Duty - Supply chain dynamics of food preparations intended for free distribution to economically weaker sections under a government-approved program - The tribunal found that the appellant's products were indeed eligible for the exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-CE. It was determined that both the Complementary Weaning Food (CWF) and the Blend of Critical Processed Materials (BCPM) manufactured by the appellant were intended for free distribution to beneficiaries under the ICDS scheme, fulfilling the criteria laid down in the notification. - The tribunal also addressed the invocation of the extended period for the demand of duties. It concluded that there was no suppression of facts by the appellant that warranted such invocation, making the demand unsustainable on limitation grounds as well.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
