Admissibility of recorded statements and electronic evidence: CESTAT excludes non compliant statements and email printouts and sets aside revaluation ...
Corporate guarantee invocation in insolvency petition: enforceability upheld, conditional sanction letter not a novation, limitation not barred after ...
NPCI-based bank account validation for IEC applications and modifications enables real-time validation; incorrect details block submission or trigger ...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6441 to 6460 of 96301 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Availability of CENVAT credit after omission of Rule 12B and...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Availability of CENVAT credit after omission of Rule 12B and validity of an addendum to a show cause notice were decided. The tribunal held that procedural regime under Rule 12B enabled textile processors to avail CENVAT credit subject to prescribed documentation and compliance, and the appellants were eligible for credit for the disputed period. An addendum issued more than two years after the original SCN introduced new grounds and was not a continuance of the original allegations; such fresh grounds require separate adjudication under the procedure for separate notices. The addendum was time-barred and unsustainable, resulting in setting aside of the impugned order.
Availability of CENVAT credit after omission of Rule 12B and validity of an addendum to a show cause notice were decided. The tribunal held that procedural regime under Rule 12B enabled textile processors to avail CENVAT credit subject to prescribed documentation and compliance, and the appellants were eligible for credit for the disputed period. An addendum issued more than two years after the original SCN introduced new grounds and was not a continuance of the original allegations; such fresh grounds require separate adjudication under the procedure for separate notices. The addendum was time-barred and unsustainable, resulting in setting aside of the impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.