Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
Appellants availed CENVAT credit on inputs allegedly received from ship breakers without proper documentation. Revenue alleged non-receipt of inputs based on statements. CESTAT held statements inadmissible without cross-examination u/s 9(D). No other evidence to prove non-receipt of inputs used in manufacturing final products. Appellant's records showed receipt of duty-paid inputs. Allegation of returning cash to suppliers unsubstantiated. In an identical case, Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal upholding adjudication order setting aside demand. Following that ratio, CESTAT held Revenue failed to establish non-receipt of inputs beyond doubt. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed.
Appellants availed CENVAT credit on inputs allegedly received from ship breakers without proper documentation. Revenue alleged non-receipt of inputs based on statements. CESTAT held statements inadmissible without cross-examination u/s 9(D). No other evidence to prove non-receipt of inputs used in manufacturing final products. Appellant's records showed receipt of duty-paid inputs. Allegation of returning cash to suppliers unsubstantiated. In an identical case, Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeal upholding adjudication order setting aside demand. Following that ratio, CESTAT held Revenue failed to establish non-receipt of inputs beyond doubt. Impugned order set aside, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
