Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The SC upheld the CESTAT's determination affirming the appellant's entitlement to the exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs for parts/components imported for the manufacture of Lithium Ion Batteries. Despite the appellant producing power banks from these batteries, the Court found that the raw materials were rightly used in the manufacture of Lithium Ion Batteries which were subsequently utilized in power bank production. The claim for exemption was therefore valid. The appellant's contention regarding the extended period of limitation was not accepted. The SC found no merit to disturb the impugned order and dismissed the appeals accordingly.
The SC upheld the CESTAT's determination affirming the appellant's entitlement to the exemption under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs for parts/components imported for the manufacture of Lithium Ion Batteries. Despite the appellant producing power banks from these batteries, the Court found that the raw materials were rightly used in the manufacture of Lithium Ion Batteries which were subsequently utilized in power bank production. The claim for exemption was therefore valid. The appellant's contention regarding the extended period of limitation was not accepted. The SC found no merit to disturb the impugned order and dismissed the appeals accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.