Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT adjudicated a complex excise duty dispute involving multiple product classifications and credit claims. The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, holding that: (1) CENVAT credit on input materials for Baking Powder is permissible even prior to registration; (2) Custard Powder qualifies for concessional 1% and 2% duty rates; (3) Corn Flour was incorrectly classified as maize starch and the corresponding duty demand was set aside; (4) The allegation of intentional duty evasion was not sustainable; (5) The extended limitation period was not invokable; and (6) Penalties against the firm and its partner were consequently quashed. The appellant remains liable for excise duties on Baking Powder, Custard Powder, Icing Sugar, and Drinking Chocolate, with specific concessional rate entitlements.
CESTAT adjudicated a complex excise duty dispute involving multiple product classifications and credit claims. The tribunal partially allowed the appeal, holding that: (1) CENVAT credit on input materials for Baking Powder is permissible even prior to registration; (2) Custard Powder qualifies for concessional 1% and 2% duty rates; (3) Corn Flour was incorrectly classified as maize starch and the corresponding duty demand was set aside; (4) The allegation of intentional duty evasion was not sustainable; (5) The extended limitation period was not invokable; and (6) Penalties against the firm and its partner were consequently quashed. The appellant remains liable for excise duties on Baking Powder, Custard Powder, Icing Sugar, and Drinking Chocolate, with specific concessional rate entitlements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.