Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT held that Central Excise officers possess jurisdiction to issue show cause notices for recovery of customs duty from EOUs under their administrative control, affirming the validity of notifications and circulars delegating such authority. However, the department failed to substantiate the clandestine removal allegations with credible evidence or proper documentation, rendering duty demands unsustainable. Procedural lapses, such as expired warehousing licenses during stock transfers between EOUs, were deemed insufficient to justify duty recovery. Consequently, demands and penalties related to shortages and clearances were set aside. The tribunal remanded issues concerning duty on deemed exports to certain parties for fresh adjudication. The appeal was allowed in part, quashing most demands while directing reconsideration of specific deemed export claims.
CESTAT held that Central Excise officers possess jurisdiction to issue show cause notices for recovery of customs duty from EOUs under their administrative control, affirming the validity of notifications and circulars delegating such authority. However, the department failed to substantiate the clandestine removal allegations with credible evidence or proper documentation, rendering duty demands unsustainable. Procedural lapses, such as expired warehousing licenses during stock transfers between EOUs, were deemed insufficient to justify duty recovery. Consequently, demands and penalties related to shortages and clearances were set aside. The tribunal remanded issues concerning duty on deemed exports to certain parties for fresh adjudication. The appeal was allowed in part, quashing most demands while directing reconsideration of specific deemed export claims.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.