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" ?
The CESTAT upheld the appellant's classification of imported polished marble slabs under the relevant Customs Tariff Heading, entitling them to benefit under Notification No. 04/2006-CE. The Tribunal relied on a binding TRU circular clarifying the tariff classification, which was not contrary to statutory provisions or judicial interpretation. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the circular was deemed clarificatory and retrospective, mandating departmental compliance. Consequently, the Tribunal found no willful misstatement of facts and ruled that the denial of notification benefits was unjustified. The impugned order was quashed, and the appeal allowed, rendering ancillary issues such as interest and penalties moot.
The CESTAT upheld the appellant's classification of imported polished marble slabs under the relevant Customs Tariff Heading, entitling them to benefit under Notification No. 04/2006-CE. The Tribunal relied on a binding TRU circular clarifying the tariff classification, which was not contrary to statutory provisions or judicial interpretation. Citing Supreme Court precedents, the circular was deemed clarificatory and retrospective, mandating departmental compliance. Consequently, the Tribunal found no willful misstatement of facts and ruled that the denial of notification benefits was unjustified. The impugned order was quashed, and the appeal allowed, rendering ancillary issues such as interest and penalties moot.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
