PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
HC quashed the Revisional Authority's order dated 31/03/2023, allowing the petition. Petitioner had initially approached wrong forum (CESTAT) to challenge Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding CENVAT credit recovery and rebate claims. Under Section 14 Limitation Act, petitioner was entitled to benefit of wrong forum approach, and revision application was filed within prescribed three months from CESTAT order date. CESTAT correctly held petitioner entitled to CENVAT credit under Chapter Heading 847490 since classification dispute was not proposed in show cause notice. Revisional Authority erred in taking contrary view to CESTAT's judicial determination on identical facts regarding product classification, violating judicial propriety. Demand for CENVAT credit disallowance was properly set aside.
HC quashed the Revisional Authority's order dated 31/03/2023, allowing the petition. Petitioner had initially approached wrong forum (CESTAT) to challenge Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding CENVAT credit recovery and rebate claims. Under Section 14 Limitation Act, petitioner was entitled to benefit of wrong forum approach, and revision application was filed within prescribed three months from CESTAT order date. CESTAT correctly held petitioner entitled to CENVAT credit under Chapter Heading 847490 since classification dispute was not proposed in show cause notice. Revisional Authority erred in taking contrary view to CESTAT's judicial determination on identical facts regarding product classification, violating judicial propriety. Demand for CENVAT credit disallowance was properly set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
