Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
NOTIFICATION NO. 10/2015-Customs (ADD), Dated: April 07, 2015 Whereas, in the matter of Poly Vinyl Chloride Paste Resin also known as Emulsion Poly Vinyl Chloride Resin (hereinafter referred to as the subject goods), falling under heading 3904 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Customs Tariff Act)
Whereas, in the matter of Flexible Slabstock Polyol of molecular weight 3000- 4000 (hereinafter referred to as the subject goods), falling under Sub-heading 3907 20 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff
Whereas, the designated authority vide notification No.15/26/2014-DGAD, dated the 16th March, 2015, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I, Section 1, dated the 16th March, 2015, has initiated review, in terms of sub-section (5) of section 9A of
Department cannot raise same grounds in the second round of ligation when the grounds taken in the first round of litigation were disposed of and no appeal was filed against the Order pertaining to first litigation
The Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat relying upon the decision in case of Nizam Sugar Factory Vs. Collector of Central Excise [2006 (197) ELT 465 (SC)], allowed the appeal in favour of the Respondent and held that where all the relevant facts were in the knowledge of authorities when first SCN was issued, while issuing second and third SCN’s on same and similar facts and on the basis of same inspection made on September 16, 1996, Department cannot allege suppression of facts by Respondent.
The nearest time in terms of Rule 7 of Excise Valuation Rules, could be the time subsequent to the time and date of clearance/removal of the goods under assessment from the factory to depots when the transaction value at or about the same time is not available
Mumbai Customs House has no jurisdiction to raise demand alleging mis-declaration of imported goods, when the goods were imported at Chennai port and Customs Authorities at Chennai had cleared goods holding that the description of the goods has not been mis-declared.
The dominant purpose of medical treatment is medical services and integral to such a service is a medical procedure that involves administering medicines and drugs and may involve, implants, stents etc., as integral to a successfully medical treatment/ procedure.
Input tax credit availed by the petitioner could not be denied and there is no need to reverse the input tax credit availed by the purchaser of the goods on the grounds that the selling dealer has not filed returns or not paid taxes or they were unregistered dealers or their registrations were retrospectively cancelled.
Government has exempted the Capital goods specified in the First schedule and Second Schedule to the Excise Tariff Act, when cleared against a Status Holder Incentive Scheme duty credit scrip issued to a Status Holder by the Regional Authority in accordance with paragraph 3.16 of the Foreign Trade Policy from:
