Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC allowed the appeal, holding that the insertion of Section 5A(1A) in the Central Excise Act, 1944 is prospective, not clarificatory. Prior to the amendment, the appellant had the option to forego the exemption on final products and pay duty to claim CENVAT credit on inputs. However, post-amendment, manufacturers of exempted excisable goods are prohibited from paying duty, precluding them from claiming CENVAT credit. The Tribunal erred in upholding the demand of CENVAT credit where the appellant had paid duty on final products and utilized input credits.
The HC allowed the appeal, holding that the insertion of Section 5A(1A) in the Central Excise Act, 1944 is prospective, not clarificatory. Prior to the amendment, the appellant had the option to forego the exemption on final products and pay duty to claim CENVAT credit on inputs. However, post-amendment, manufacturers of exempted excisable goods are prohibited from paying duty, precluding them from claiming CENVAT credit. The Tribunal erred in upholding the demand of CENVAT credit where the appellant had paid duty on final products and utilized input credits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
