Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 26(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the appellant for alleged fraudulent availment and passing on of Cenvat Credit. The tribunal held that the statutory requirements for admissibility of statements under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act were not met, as the mandatory procedure under Section 9D was not followed. The appellant was not found to have supplied goods to the manufacturers as alleged, and there was no evidence of mens rea or deliberate evasion. Additionally, the main noticee had settled the dispute under the SVLDRS scheme, precluding penalty on the appellant. The penalty demand was also barred by limitation due to absence of evidence of collusion or fraudulent intent. Consequently, the penalty order was unsustainable and was quashed.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 26(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the appellant for alleged fraudulent availment and passing on of Cenvat Credit. The tribunal held that the statutory requirements for admissibility of statements under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act were not met, as the mandatory procedure under Section 9D was not followed. The appellant was not found to have supplied goods to the manufacturers as alleged, and there was no evidence of mens rea or deliberate evasion. Additionally, the main noticee had settled the dispute under the SVLDRS scheme, precluding penalty on the appellant. The penalty demand was also barred by limitation due to absence of evidence of collusion or fraudulent intent. Consequently, the penalty order was unsustainable and was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
