PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
CESTAT set aside the impugned demand of central excise duty, interest and penalties arising from alleged clandestine removal and alleged shortages, holding that the adjudicating authority failed to verify physical stock-taking/weighment records, relied on uncorroborated private handwritten notes without compliance with statutory admissibility safeguards, and admitted statements without observance of mandatory evidentiary procedure. The Tribunal found absence of tangible corroborative evidence of clandestine clearance, no seizure or identified buyers, and no proof of reversalable credit misuse; accordingly the duty demand is unsustainable. Penalty imposed under r.26 CER, 2002 on the company's director is quashed. Appeal disposed of.
CESTAT set aside the impugned demand of central excise duty, interest and penalties arising from alleged clandestine removal and alleged shortages, holding that the adjudicating authority failed to verify physical stock-taking/weighment records, relied on uncorroborated private handwritten notes without compliance with statutory admissibility safeguards, and admitted statements without observance of mandatory evidentiary procedure. The Tribunal found absence of tangible corroborative evidence of clandestine clearance, no seizure or identified buyers, and no proof of reversalable credit misuse; accordingly the duty demand is unsustainable. Penalty imposed under r.26 CER, 2002 on the company's director is quashed. Appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.