Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2011 (4) TMI 523

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....asad, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, and P. Parmeswaran, Advocates, for the Appellant. S/Shri Alok Yadav and M.P. Devanath, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Heard learned counsel for the parties on these appeals. 2. Our attention is drawn to the impugned judgment and order passed by CEGAT, West Regional Bench at Mumbai on 29-9-2000. By the said judgment, the two-judges Bench of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... manner :- "(a)   Revenue neutrality being a question of fact, the same is to be established in the facts of each case and not merely by showing the availability of an alternate scheme; (b)     Where the Scheme opted for by the assessee is found to have been misused (in contradistinction to mere deviation or failure to observe all the conditions) the existence o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se (c) thereof, whereas clauses (a), (b) and (d) do not appear to have been taken notice of or considered by the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the impugned judgment and order. A bare reading of the order of the Tribunal makes the position crystal clear that there is no proper discussion of all the factual issues arising for consideration. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mbustion Efficiency Chem. P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad, 2008 (225) E.L.T. 391 (Tri.-Mumbai). There is yet another decision of this court in Union of India v. Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills, 2009 (13) SCC 448 (sic) = 2009 (238) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) wherein also principles and circumstances in which extended period of limitation would be applicable have been discussed. 5.&em....