CBEC Circular on recovery during pendency of appeal is arbitrary, unjustified & unlawful – Bombay HC
Case Law Details
Case Name : Larsen & Toubro Limited & Anr Vs The Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
All High Courts Bombay High Court
Sr. No. 10 of the circular of the Board deals with an appeal to the CESTAT where the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed a demand in an order in original of the adjudicating authority. The circular stipulates that recovery has to be initiated immediately on the issue of the order in appeal. In a situation where the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand made in the order of adjudication, the assessee is permitted by the provisions of Section 35F to move the Tribunal for a dispensation of the requirement of deposit. But the circular mandates that recovery shall be made immediately on ...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
The judgement is by Bombay High Court, but not of Delhi HC.
In the subject line, Delhi HC is mentioned.
(K. V. Hari Babu)
09322904665