Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The HC dismisses the Revenue's appeals and affirms the CESTAT's order. The CESTAT's factual findings that the impugned skin-barrier micropore surgical tapes are not within Notification No.21/2002-Cus are sustained, including reliance on additional material placed before the Tribunal. The Court holds the extended limitation under s.28(4) is not attracted absent proved collusion, willful misstatement or suppression, hence the show-cause notice could not cover the extended period; corresponding duty and penalty under s.114A are therefore not leviable. The Court declines to opine on a separate CESTAT bench decision and rejects the Revenue's challenge to the self-assessment finding for want of pleaded perversity. Appeals dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.