Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Allegations of clandestine removal of polished vitrified tiles and evasion of duty were primarily based on private documents/records recovered from premises of M/s K.N. Brothers/Shree Ambaji Enterprises, Shroff, and office of Shri Pravin Shirvi, Broker/middlemen. CESTAT held that opportunity of cross-examination was not provided, violating principles of natural justice. Reliability of statements was doubtful as there were discrepancies in amounts mentioned. Cross-examination of witnesses is mandatory u/s 9D of the Act. Untested statements of third parties cannot be sole basis for adverse conclusion against assessee. Positive and tangible evidence is required to establish clandestine removal, not assumptions and presumptions. Entire demand was theoretical and theoretical. Impugned order set aside and appeal allowed.
Allegations of clandestine removal of polished vitrified tiles and evasion of duty were primarily based on private documents/records recovered from premises of M/s K.N. Brothers/Shree Ambaji Enterprises, Shroff, and office of Shri Pravin Shirvi, Broker/middlemen. CESTAT held that opportunity of cross-examination was not provided, violating principles of natural justice. Reliability of statements was doubtful as there were discrepancies in amounts mentioned. Cross-examination of witnesses is mandatory u/s 9D of the Act. Untested statements of third parties cannot be sole basis for adverse conclusion against assessee. Positive and tangible evidence is required to establish clandestine removal, not assumptions and presumptions. Entire demand was theoretical and theoretical. Impugned order set aside and appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.