Extended Demand Period unsustainable Without Tax Evasion Intent

Kanoria Energy & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)

Summary: In the case of Kanoria Energy & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, the CESTAT, New Delhi, ruled that an extended period of demand cannot be sustained without establishing an intent to evade tax. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing asbestos cement pipes, had claimed exemption under Notification 06/2002-CE for using fly ash in their products. A 2006 investigation by excise officers alleged suppression of facts and e

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.