Alternative statutory remedy under GST bars writ challenge where classification, notice variance, and hearing disputes require factual appellate revie...
Duplicate PAN cancellation timeframe requires prior administrative representation before judicial intervention, ensuring a time-bound decision on the ...
The appellant, a job worker, violated Rules 6 and 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules by not including the value of free supply material from the prime manufacturer while clearing job-worked goods on payment of duty. This amounted to suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, invoking the extended period of limitation u/s 11A(4). The assessable value should have included the value of raw materials supplied for job work, as per Supreme Court decisions. The benefit of Notification 214/86-CE was not admissible due to non-compliance with conditions. Rule 10A provided definiteness for valuation of goods manufactured and cleared by job workers.
The appellant, a job worker, violated Rules 6 and 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules by not including the value of free supply material from the prime manufacturer while clearing job-worked goods on payment of duty. This amounted to suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, invoking the extended period of limitation u/s 11A(4). The assessable value should have included the value of raw materials supplied for job work, as per Supreme Court decisions. The benefit of Notification 214/86-CE was not admissible due to non-compliance with conditions. Rule 10A provided definiteness for valuation of goods manufactured and cleared by job workers.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
