Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
The case involved a dispute regarding the switching of options u/r 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 within the same financial year. The issue was whether a manufacturer could switch options without proper intimation to the jurisdictional Central Excise authority. The High Court held that the restriction on withdrawing the option during the financial year only applies if the manufacturer has formally intimated the Range Superintendent of the switch. The court found no evidence that the manufacturer had exercised the initial option as claimed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal and quash the Order-in-Original was upheld, dismissing the appeal.
The case involved a dispute regarding the switching of options u/r 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 within the same financial year. The issue was whether a manufacturer could switch options without proper intimation to the jurisdictional Central Excise authority. The High Court held that the restriction on withdrawing the option during the financial year only applies if the manufacturer has formally intimated the Range Superintendent of the switch. The court found no evidence that the manufacturer had exercised the initial option as claimed by the Commissioner. The Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal and quash the Order-in-Original was upheld, dismissing the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
