Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Excise Duty

Extended Demand Period unsustainable Without Tax Evasion Intent

Case Law Details

Case Name
Kanoria Energy & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement 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 evasion of excise duty...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *