Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
661 to 680 of 96208 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 4811 
Join Channel 
