SEZ unit exempt from service tax on manpower supply; overseas employers deemed employers; limitation invocation unjustified; directors' remuneration n...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10021 to 10040 of 96504 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT held that the appellant-company erroneously availed Notification No.36/1996 benefit under Sl.10 shortly after its amendment, but the error was bona fide; differential duty and interest were paid and a minor interest shortfall was admitted. There was no misstatement, mis-declaration or suppression in the Bill of Entry. Consequently, imposition of penalty under s.114A, and penalty under s.112(b) on the vice-president, were unwarranted and set aside. The impugned order was modified, the company's appeal was partly allowed to the extent of cancelling penalties, the vice-president's appeal was allowed, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly.
CESTAT held that the appellant-company erroneously availed Notification No.36/1996 benefit under Sl.10 shortly after its amendment, but the error was bona fide; differential duty and interest were paid and a minor interest shortfall was admitted. There was no misstatement, mis-declaration or suppression in the Bill of Entry. Consequently, imposition of penalty under s.114A, and penalty under s.112(b) on the vice-president, were unwarranted and set aside. The impugned order was modified, the company's appeal was partly allowed to the extent of cancelling penalties, the vice-president's appeal was allowed, and the appeals were disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
