Concessional Basic Customs Duty on Ethernet switches: classification as enterprise switches upheld, challenge dismissed for lack of substantial law qu...
Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6581 to 6600 of 96262 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.