Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
CESTAT held that the Board's 06.04.2016 circular is prospective and cannot be applied retrospectively; consequent demands of central excise duty based on retrospective application are unsustainable and are set aside. Products manufactured by the appellants were reclassified: certain micronutrient/bio-fertiliser products under CETH 3105/3101 and Plant Growth Regulators under CETH 3808 as per essential-character analysis; specific findings upheld for the impugned products. Demands of interest and penalties arising from the unsustainable duty demands were quashed. Personal penalty under Rule 26(1), CEX Rules, 2002 against the managing director was set aside for lack of mens rea. Deposits paid under protest are refundable subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment. Appeal disposed of.
CESTAT held that the Board's 06.04.2016 circular is prospective and cannot be applied retrospectively; consequent demands of central excise duty based on retrospective application are unsustainable and are set aside. Products manufactured by the appellants were reclassified: certain micronutrient/bio-fertiliser products under CETH 3105/3101 and Plant Growth Regulators under CETH 3808 as per essential-character analysis; specific findings upheld for the impugned products. Demands of interest and penalties arising from the unsustainable duty demands were quashed. Personal penalty under Rule 26(1), CEX Rules, 2002 against the managing director was set aside for lack of mens rea. Deposits paid under protest are refundable subject to adjudication on unjust enrichment. Appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
