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...
CESTAT partially allowed the appeal involving clandestine removal allegations of craft paper and packing material. The tribunal set aside demands totaling Rs. 23,03,781 for alleged clandestine clearance of kraft paper and Rs. 74,827 for packing material, finding insufficient independent corroboration despite documents recovered during searches. The department's case relied solely on self-incriminating statements without verifying evidence through simultaneous searches of suppliers and customers. Regarding CENVAT credit denial for GTA services worth Rs. 3,19,176, the matter was remanded for redetermination under normal limitation period following CBIC Circular 1065/4/2018. The undervaluation demand of Rs. 10,71,211 under Rule 7 was remanded for assessment within normal limitation since clearances were reflected in ER-1 returns. Extended limitation period invocation was deemed inappropriate for disclosed transactions.
CESTAT partially allowed the appeal involving clandestine removal allegations of craft paper and packing material. The tribunal set aside demands totaling Rs. 23,03,781 for alleged clandestine clearance of kraft paper and Rs. 74,827 for packing material, finding insufficient independent corroboration despite documents recovered during searches. The department's case relied solely on self-incriminating statements without verifying evidence through simultaneous searches of suppliers and customers. Regarding CENVAT credit denial for GTA services worth Rs. 3,19,176, the matter was remanded for redetermination under normal limitation period following CBIC Circular 1065/4/2018. The undervaluation demand of Rs. 10,71,211 under Rule 7 was remanded for assessment within normal limitation since clearances were reflected in ER-1 returns. Extended limitation period invocation was deemed inappropriate for disclosed transactions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.