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 held that the appellant satisfied all conditions prescribed for the export of brown basmati rice under the Foreign Trade Policy and that FSSAI standards do not mandatorily apply to such exports unless explicitly stipulated. The Revenue failed to produce statutory provisions or authoritative notifications to establish the applicability of FSSAI norms to the exported goods. Additionally, no evidence was presented showing rejection of the consignment by the importing country or diversion of goods. The reliance on a non-specialized laboratory report was insufficient to prove misdeclaration. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's order, quashing demands of confiscation, redemption fine, duty, and penalties, and allowed the appeal.
The CESTAT held that the appellant satisfied all conditions prescribed for the export of brown basmati rice under the Foreign Trade Policy and that FSSAI standards do not mandatorily apply to such exports unless explicitly stipulated. The Revenue failed to produce statutory provisions or authoritative notifications to establish the applicability of FSSAI norms to the exported goods. Additionally, no evidence was presented showing rejection of the consignment by the importing country or diversion of goods. The reliance on a non-specialized laboratory report was insufficient to prove misdeclaration. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's order, quashing demands of confiscation, redemption fine, duty, and penalties, and allowed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
