Functional comparability governs selection of support-service and IT-enabled service comparables, with verification required for unresolved data and m...
Bank account freezing requires statutory authority; anti-money-laundering compliance and KYC monitoring do not permit unilateral indefinite restrictio...
CESTAT allowed the appeal against denial of excise duty exemption under N/N. 01/2011-CE, setting aside Commissioner's order. The Tribunal held that extended period of limitation under Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act was wrongly invoked. Mere wrong availment of exemption notification without substantiated deliberate suppression cannot justify extended limitation period. Department failed to prove intentional evasion of duty, particularly since three prior audits found no irregularities and appellant regularly filed returns. The bona fide belief of eligibility for exemption was accepted. Show cause notice issued on 26.06.2020 was time-barred as it could only be issued within normal limitation period under Section 11A(1).
CESTAT allowed the appeal against denial of excise duty exemption under N/N. 01/2011-CE, setting aside Commissioner's order. The Tribunal held that extended period of limitation under Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act was wrongly invoked. Mere wrong availment of exemption notification without substantiated deliberate suppression cannot justify extended limitation period. Department failed to prove intentional evasion of duty, particularly since three prior audits found no irregularities and appellant regularly filed returns. The bona fide belief of eligibility for exemption was accepted. Show cause notice issued on 26.06.2020 was time-barred as it could only be issued within normal limitation period under Section 11A(1).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
