Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
CESTAT upheld the Original Authority's determination that the appellant qualifies as a "new industrial unit" under Para 5(a) of Notification No.20/2007-C.E., concluding the unit commenced commercial production w.e.f. 31.03.2017. The Tribunal rejected the revenue's continuity theory equating the appellant with the pre-existing unit, finding distinct operational setups and no evidentiary basis to treat them as identical; the appellant's establishment at a location approved by the competent State Committee further corroborated its status. Because the appellant falls within the first category of the Notification, the 25% expansion precondition is inapplicable. Consequently, the appellant is entitled to the ten-year exemption under Notification No.20/2007-C.E.; appeal disposed.
CESTAT upheld the Original Authority's determination that the appellant qualifies as a "new industrial unit" under Para 5(a) of Notification No.20/2007-C.E., concluding the unit commenced commercial production w.e.f. 31.03.2017. The Tribunal rejected the revenue's continuity theory equating the appellant with the pre-existing unit, finding distinct operational setups and no evidentiary basis to treat them as identical; the appellant's establishment at a location approved by the competent State Committee further corroborated its status. Because the appellant falls within the first category of the Notification, the 25% expansion precondition is inapplicable. Consequently, the appellant is entitled to the ten-year exemption under Notification No.20/2007-C.E.; appeal disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
