Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
No duty was payable on free warranty replacement inputs where the value of warranty was already embedded in the final product and the cleared goods fell within the scope of inputs used for providing free warranty under Notification No. 3/2011-CE (NT). The Tribunal held that the appellant's differential treatment between removed inputs and manufactured goods did not justify a duty demand, and the demand was unsustainable. On debit notes raised for repair charges on damaged inputs, the Tribunal found no evidence that the inputs were not subsequently used in manufacture; in the absence of proof of non-use, CENVAT credit remained admissible and duty could not be demanded on that basis. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
No duty was payable on free warranty replacement inputs where the value of warranty was already embedded in the final product and the cleared goods fell within the scope of inputs used for providing free warranty under Notification No. 3/2011-CE (NT). The Tribunal held that the appellant's differential treatment between removed inputs and manufactured goods did not justify a duty demand, and the demand was unsustainable. On debit notes raised for repair charges on damaged inputs, the Tribunal found no evidence that the inputs were not subsequently used in manufacture; in the absence of proof of non-use, CENVAT credit remained admissible and duty could not be demanded on that basis. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
