Appeal dismissed: petitioner denied ITC for electricity used in township maintenance as residential supply; Explanation 1(d) prospective under s.2(17)...
Registration under section 12AA granted where substantive charitable objects for ex-servicemen, incidental commercial activity permitted and profits a...
CESTAT set aside the Commissioner's interpretation of the exemption notification, holding that the phrase "for use" was incorrectly construed and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. The appeal was allowed by way of remand for re-calculation of any demand; the respondent must demonstrate, including via its ERP records, that imported material was exclusively used for PDS supply. The Tribunal found the Department's consumption-allocation methodology unsupported as FIFO and based on assumptions. Issues of time-bar and penalty were held not open before the Tribunal absent a cross-appeal and are left to the Adjudicating Authority to decide if a demand is confirmed.
CESTAT set aside the Commissioner's interpretation of the exemption notification, holding that the phrase "for use" was incorrectly construed and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. The appeal was allowed by way of remand for re-calculation of any demand; the respondent must demonstrate, including via its ERP records, that imported material was exclusively used for PDS supply. The Tribunal found the Department's consumption-allocation methodology unsupported as FIFO and based on assumptions. Issues of time-bar and penalty were held not open before the Tribunal absent a cross-appeal and are left to the Adjudicating Authority to decide if a demand is confirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
