Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Captive exemption for Fatty Acid Pitch (FAP), an intermediate product, was denied despite being otherwise excisable, citing Rule 6(3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules. The Adjudicating Authority concluded FAP was used as fuel in boilers producing steam for manufacturing exempted goods based on Audit team's observations and Appellants' letters, without verifying claims. Extended period invoked despite no evidence of deliberate duty evasion. Appellants provided relevant details, but no further inquiry conducted. Lack of cogent verifiable evidence that FAP was used for exempted products invalidates denial of exemption benefit. Invoking extended period without substantiating assertions is legally untenable. Impugned order unsustainable on merits and limitation, appeal allowed.
Captive exemption for Fatty Acid Pitch (FAP), an intermediate product, was denied despite being otherwise excisable, citing Rule 6(3A) of Cenvat Credit Rules. The Adjudicating Authority concluded FAP was used as fuel in boilers producing steam for manufacturing exempted goods based on Audit team's observations and Appellants' letters, without verifying claims. Extended period invoked despite no evidence of deliberate duty evasion. Appellants provided relevant details, but no further inquiry conducted. Lack of cogent verifiable evidence that FAP was used for exempted products invalidates denial of exemption benefit. Invoking extended period without substantiating assertions is legally untenable. Impugned order unsustainable on merits and limitation, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.