Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
The HC held that an appeal against the CESTAT order would lie before the Supreme Court u/s 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the original order passed by the Commissioner considered issues relating to taxability, allowability of CENVAT credit, and imposition of penalty, despite CESTAT only examining the limitation issue. Consequently, the HC dismissed the present appeal as not maintainable before it.
The HC held that an appeal against the CESTAT order would lie before the Supreme Court u/s 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as the original order passed by the Commissioner considered issues relating to taxability, allowability of CENVAT credit, and imposition of penalty, despite CESTAT only examining the limitation issue. Consequently, the HC dismissed the present appeal as not maintainable before it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
