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...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
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 4811 
Join Channel 
