Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Clandestine manufacture and recovery of Central Excise Duty along with interest and penalty - suppression of facts and misrepresentation alleged against petitioner - adjudicating authority failed to consider petitioner's reply while passing impugned order - assessment period covered by earlier orders of coordinate authorities - principles of natural justice violated - doctrine of res judicata applicable. Careful perusal of first appellate authority's order revealed core issue was production capacity of machine, concluded based on evidence as 301-750 pouches per minute, contrary to adjudicating authority's subsequent finding of above 751 pouches. First appellate authority interfered with adjudicating authority's order, holding it unsupported by evidence/records. Clear finding of no suppression or misrepresentation by petitioner. First appellate authority's factual findings binding on adjudicating authority unless overturned by higher authority/court, which is not the case. Mere submissions by respondents without supporting facts cannot establish petitioner's reply was considered. Impugned order passed in violation of natural justice. Principle of res judicata rightly applied by Tribunal. First appellate authority found no willful suppression or mala fide intention by petitioner, rendering invocation of jurisdiction u/s 11A untenable. Alternative remedy under statute not efficacious in present circumstances. Petition allowed.
Clandestine manufacture and recovery of Central Excise Duty along with interest and penalty - suppression of facts and misrepresentation alleged against petitioner - adjudicating authority failed to consider petitioner's reply while passing impugned order - assessment period covered by earlier orders of coordinate authorities - principles of natural justice violated - doctrine of res judicata applicable. Careful perusal of first appellate authority's order revealed core issue was production capacity of machine, concluded based on evidence as 301-750 pouches per minute, contrary to adjudicating authority's subsequent finding of above 751 pouches. First appellate authority interfered with adjudicating authority's order, holding it unsupported by evidence/records. Clear finding of no suppression or misrepresentation by petitioner. First appellate authority's factual findings binding on adjudicating authority unless overturned by higher authority/court, which is not the case. Mere submissions by respondents without supporting facts cannot establish petitioner's reply was considered. Impugned order passed in violation of natural justice. Principle of res judicata rightly applied by Tribunal. First appellate authority found no willful suppression or mala fide intention by petitioner, rendering invocation of jurisdiction u/s 11A untenable. Alternative remedy under statute not efficacious in present circumstances. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
