GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 514 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (11) TMI 514 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Valuation - Appellant collected the cost of the moulds and dyes from their customers and it was not included in the assessable value - Held that:- Commissioner (Appeals) observed that balance sheet for the year 2004-05 could not have been available on 25.07.2005 which was prepared in October/November after closure of financial year. We do not find any material on record that the Department had initiated any enquiry for getting the figures despite thei .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

per earlier order dt.22.06.2011 of the Tribunal. - Impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No.E/1181,1182/2007-DB - Order No.A/11141-11142/2015 - Dated:- 30-7-2015 - Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) And Mr. P.M. Saleem, Member (Technical) For the Petitioner : Shri Kuntal Parikh, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri Alok Srivastava, Authorised Representative ORDER Per: P.K. Das These appeals are arising out of common order and therefore, both are taken up together for d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the period 2004-05 and 2005-06 respectively, demanding duty alongwith interest and to impose penalty. 3. Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty of ₹ 2,34,934.00 and ₹ 1,86,739.00 alongwith interest and imposed penalties. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Adjudication order. 4. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, we find that the main contention of the learned Advocate on behalf of the Appellant is that the extended period of limitation cannot be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

04 and therefore, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. He relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Nizam Sugar Factory Vs CCE 2006 (197) ELT 465 (SC). 5. On the other hand, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that the demand was raised on the basis of balance sheet. It is submitted that the balance sheet was prepared in 2006 and therefore, show cause notice was issued in September 2006. It is further submitted that the Appellant h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version