CENVAT credit on capital goods in a captive power plant is examined under the exclusive-use test in Rule 6(4): substantial captive use of electricity in manufacturing dutiable goods means surplus external supply does not itself establish exclusive use for exempt output. Specified common input services may similarly qualify for full credit under Rule 6(5) where not exclusively linked to exempt output. Credit on iron and steel repair items depends on their actual use in maintaining existing plant and machinery rather than their description. The discussion also addresses the sustainability of duty demands on waste and scrap from capital goods where factual findings lack demonstrated statutory or evidentiary infirmity.

Extended limitation for service-tax demand cannot rest solely on income-tax data where no investigation establishes the nature of taxable service, service recipient, or consideration. Form 26AS did not show receipts for provision of services, and the explanation that receipts arose from trading in plant saplings and seeds was not meaningfully examined. The stated business activities supported a bona fide belief that service-tax registration and payment were unnecessary. As suppression or wilful intent to evade tax was not established, the extended period was held inapplicable and the demand was set aside.

Res judicata does not bar an appeal arising from remand proceedings where those proceedings continue the original refund-credit dispute rather than constitute parallel proceedings on the same cause of action. Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code applies only where an issue was directly and substantially in issue and finally decided in an earlier proceeding. In service-tax appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals) must identify the points for determination and give a reasoned decision under the applicable appellate provisions. Dismissal solely on res judicata, without deciding the refund-credit dispute on merits, requires reconsideration through a de novo hearing.

Mechanical adjournment requests cannot justify postponement beyond the statutory maximum of three adjournments. Where the appellant repeatedly sought adjournments and remained absent, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution under Rule 20 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982.

Premiums retained when life-insurance policies lapse or are repudiated for non-payment or misdeclaration do not constitute consideration for agreeing to tolerate an act under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994. Such retention is an incident of the original insurance contract, which becomes void or lapses on specified defaults, rather than consideration for an independent obligation to tolerate those defaults. A declared service requires a specific contractual obligation to refrain from, tolerate, or do an act, with a direct nexus between that obligation and the consideration. Taxing retained premiums separately would also result in double taxation. Accordingly, the service-tax demand, interest and penalties are unsustainable.

Reverse-charge service tax on legal services received from advocates or law firms was revenue-neutral where the recipient could claim full CENVAT credit for use in providing taxable output services. Because payment of tax and corresponding credit availability created no net revenue loss, the service-tax demand was unsustainable. As the underlying tax liability could not survive, consequential interest and penalty were also unsustainable. The confirmed reverse-charge liability on the disputed legal services was annulled, with consequential relief available in accordance with law.

Examination-related services supplied to educational institutions for voluntary Olympiad and talent-search tests fall within the service-tax exemption for services relating to the conduct of examination. The exemption covers activities directly connected with examinations, including question-paper preparation, examination materials, evaluation, tabulation and result declaration, without requiring that examinations be compulsory or curriculum-based. Where schools identify participants, collect fees, conduct tests and forward answer sheets, they are the service recipients despite the students' ultimate benefit. Extended limitation requires evidence of deliberate concealment, wilful misstatement or intent to evade tax; an interpretational dispute supported by disclosed records does not establish suppression. Consequently, no consequential penalty arises where the exemption applies and bona fide belief is supported.

Adjustment or refund of service tax paid cannot be determined before the contract is classified as a works contract or a service contract. The applicable tax incidence and nature of tax liability depend on that classification. As the classification exercise remained pending after remand, any definitive denial of adjustment or refund was speculative and premature. The earlier finding was vacated, and the appropriate authority must consider the adjustment or refund question after completing contract classification.

Regular bail in money-laundering proceedings was considered in light of allegations that local area development funds were misused through 32 tenders for sports equipment and that public funds were diverted. The investigation material was considered insufficient to support release at that stage. Regular bail was therefore declined.

Regular bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was declined because the scheduled offence continued to subsist and the applicant did not satisfy the statutory requirements for bail. The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition while granting liberty to renew the bail request before the Trial Court at an appropriate stage.

Foreign-exchange compliance governing non-resident share transfers, escrow arrangements, overseas-loan security and residential status is examined. Recording bank shares in the names of unapproved non-resident entities was treated as prohibited, with resulting corporate and role-based liability for responsible directors, officers and company secretaries. Escrow accounts and custody arrangements securing overseas loans required prior Reserve Bank permission and could constitute prohibited deposits or guarantees. The chairman's foreign-exchange charge did not stand because he was treated as resident outside India at the relevant time. Penalties were substantially reduced.

For non-physical software imports, the importer must establish actual receipt of software corresponding to foreign-exchange remittances through reliable certification; an intimation to Customs, a pre-import valuation report, and a later expert opinion based on company-supplied CDs were insufficient. The material therefore supported the company's contravention, although penalties were substantially reduced for financial hardship. A CEO, director, shareholder and joint authorised signatory who authorised outward remittances was personally liable where his statement indicated the software lacked value and he failed to prove due diligence to prevent the contravention.

Alleged fraudulent removal from directorship, share transfers, misuse of digital signatures and internal management disputes must be pursued through the specialised company-law mechanism under the Companies Act, 2013. Investigation into alleged fraud or misconduct in company affairs is available through the National Company Law Tribunal, while claimed industrial-policy and lease-condition breaches depend on resolution of the underlying corporate dispute. Disputed questions concerning consent, transfer documents and record authenticity require evidence and investigation unsuitable for writ jurisdiction. Alleged official inaction does not create a public law element in an essentially private corporate dispute, leaving the petitioner to seek relief before competent company-law authorities.

Independent Chartered Accountants who certify statutory e-Forms are not officers or officers in default merely because they act as external professional certifiers. Criminal liability for false filings requires specific material showing knowing falsity, intentional concealment, or active connivance; certification alone does not establish mens rea. Responsibility for accurate filings primarily rests with the company and its directors. Prosecution for offences carrying a maximum two-year sentence must be instituted within the applicable three-year limitation period, unless delay is validly condoned. Proceedings initiated after that period without a sufficient basis for condonation are barred by limitation.

Magnesium Bis-glycinate Chelate is classified as a single chemically defined coordination compound by reference to its organic ligand under Chapter Note 5(C)(3) of Chapter 29. As the ligand, glycine, falls under Heading 2922, the product is classifiable under Tariff Item 2922 49 90 as other amino-acids and their esters; salts thereof. Water and citric acid do not alter this result because permitted water and stabilisers required for preservation or transport are disregarded. Classification follows the goods' objective characteristics and composition at import, rather than their intended use in nutritional supplements; the product is not a food preparation or antibiotic.

Redemption fine and penalty for alleged import misdeclaration require proof that the importer misdeclared quantity or value and, for redemption fine, determination of market price and margin of profit. Supplier documents supported the declared quantity, with no evidence that the importer ordered excess goods or suppressed quantity. The value enhancement relied on assessment practice rather than specific contemporaneous import data or an identified valuation rule. As misdeclaration under the Customs Act was not established and the required basis for redemption fine was absent, the fine and penalty were unsustainable.

Customs Broker licensing proceedings were not invalidated because the show-cause notice was issued within the prescribed period and subsequent inquiry and hearing provided adequate opportunity despite no separate post-suspension hearing. Regulation 10(d) was not breached where declarations relied on importer-supplied, importer-approved invoices, bills of lading and checklists, without proof that the broker knew of, colluded in, or facilitated misdeclaration. Regulation 10(e) was also not breached because no evidence showed that the broker imparted incorrect information to the importer. Revocation of licence, security-deposit forfeiture and penalty therefore lacked a sustainable basis.

Recommendatory anti-dumping final findings do not create a statutory obligation to consider representations against them before a Central Government notification is issued. A writ direction cannot create a remedy unavailable under law or compel a decision on representations where no statutory duty exists. As the findings had not yet resulted in notification and a statutory appeal to CESTAT would be available after notification, the requested writ intervention was premature. The High Court therefore declined to direct consideration of the representations or exercise writ jurisdiction.

Section 130 of the Customs Act excludes High Court appellate jurisdiction over Tribunal determinations relating to the rate of customs duty or the value of goods for assessment. Challenges involving anti-dumping duty and valuation must therefore follow the appellate route under Section 130E, requiring pursuit before the Supreme Court rather than the High Court.

RTGS credits purportedly received from gold sales were treated as a benami transaction where demonetised cash was deposited with the alleged benamidar, followed by transfers from entities under his control, supported by his sworn statement regarding RTGS-entry arrangements. Invoices, ledgers and stock records did not independently substantiate genuine sales, and the absence of prior business dealings, timing, rates and unusual weights weakened the explanation. Cross-examination was not required where no intermediary statement existed, the benamidar was summoned but did not appear, and no actual prejudice was shown. The provisional attachment was therefore sustained.