Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
Appellants providing long duration courses not approved by AICTE were exempted from service tax liability u/s 65(105)(zzc) of Finance Act, 1994 until Finance Act, 2011 removed the exemption. However, Finance Act, 2012 reinstated the exemption from 01.07.2012. Thus, appellants had no tax liability for the impugned period. The department wrongly alleged suppression of facts and invoked extended period of limitation despite absence of tax evasion or malafide intent. CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Appellants providing long duration courses not approved by AICTE were exempted from service tax liability u/s 65(105)(zzc) of Finance Act, 1994 until Finance Act, 2011 removed the exemption. However, Finance Act, 2012 reinstated the exemption from 01.07.2012. Thus, appellants had no tax liability for the impugned period. The department wrongly alleged suppression of facts and invoked extended period of limitation despite absence of tax evasion or malafide intent. CESTAT set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
