Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal, affirming that sub-contractors can claim excise duty exemption under N/N. 6/2006-CE for thermal power project supplies when the main contractor (ABB Limited) was awarded the contract through International Competitive Bidding. The tribunal determined that the appellant met all necessary conditions by supplying goods for NTPC's power project, with the main contractor having complied with certification requirements. Relying on precedent from a coordinate bench, the tribunal held that the exemption applies to sub-contractors when the primary contractual conditions are satisfied, thereby reversing the initial denial of duty exemption.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, affirming that sub-contractors can claim excise duty exemption under N/N. 6/2006-CE for thermal power project supplies when the main contractor (ABB Limited) was awarded the contract through International Competitive Bidding. The tribunal determined that the appellant met all necessary conditions by supplying goods for NTPC's power project, with the main contractor having complied with certification requirements. Relying on precedent from a coordinate bench, the tribunal held that the exemption applies to sub-contractors when the primary contractual conditions are satisfied, thereby reversing the initial denial of duty exemption.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
