Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the ISD's distribution of CENVAT/ITC to the recipient unit was lawful; mere technical defects in supplier invoices (addressed to another unit or absence of non-essential particulars) and reliance on internal CWIP ledgers do not suffice to disallow credit where genuineness is not disproved and corroborative evidence (payments, vouchers, performance proof) exists. The Tribunal found no findings of fabricated invoices, shell suppliers or circular payments and concluded the Department failed to establish the two statutory conditions under Rule 7/ISD provisions. Further, invocation of the extended limitation period was not established, rendering the demand time-barred. Consequently the demand, interest and penalties were vacated.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the ISD's distribution of CENVAT/ITC to the recipient unit was lawful; mere technical defects in supplier invoices (addressed to another unit or absence of non-essential particulars) and reliance on internal CWIP ledgers do not suffice to disallow credit where genuineness is not disproved and corroborative evidence (payments, vouchers, performance proof) exists. The Tribunal found no findings of fabricated invoices, shell suppliers or circular payments and concluded the Department failed to establish the two statutory conditions under Rule 7/ISD provisions. Further, invocation of the extended limitation period was not established, rendering the demand time-barred. Consequently the demand, interest and penalties were vacated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
