Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Classification of the impugned goods turned on whether they were cosmetics/toiletry preparations or Ayurvedic medicines; the Tribunal held that documentary proof of manufacture, licences, GMP certificate and Directorate opinion supported Ayurvedic classification and that the Revenue bore the burden to prove cosmetic character, which it failed to do due to absence of test reports or other evidence. The Tribunal further found non-disclosure of material evidence in the show cause proceedings amounted to mala fides, rendering adjudications confirming duty, interest, penalties and confiscation unsustainable; appeals were allowed and demands set aside.
Classification of the impugned goods turned on whether they were cosmetics/toiletry preparations or Ayurvedic medicines; the Tribunal held that documentary proof of manufacture, licences, GMP certificate and Directorate opinion supported Ayurvedic classification and that the Revenue bore the burden to prove cosmetic character, which it failed to do due to absence of test reports or other evidence. The Tribunal further found non-disclosure of material evidence in the show cause proceedings amounted to mala fides, rendering adjudications confirming duty, interest, penalties and confiscation unsustainable; appeals were allowed and demands set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.