Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram
Central Excise - Highlights / Catch Notes

Home Highlights September 2015 Year 2015 This

The question of fact, which is disputed by the Revenue, has not ...

Central Excise

September 18, 2015

The question of fact, which is disputed by the Revenue, has not been addressed by the Tribunal. Once a finding is recorded by the Tribunal on facts, it is supposed to address each and every issue that is placed before it by the parties on such fact - HC

View Source

 


 

You may also like:

  1. Confiscation of imported goods - multi-functional devices - requirement to meet the standards as 'printers / plotters' as per Electronics & Information Technology Goods...

  2. Revision u/s 263 - As could be seen from the substantial questions of law suggested by the revenue, the revenue has not raised any question on the said finding of the...

  3. Power of tribunal to decide an appeal on merit without addressing the issue of pre-deposit - tribunal has committed an error - remanded back to Tribunal to be heard afresh - HC

  4. Validity of Revision u/s 263 by CIT - The tribunal, after examining the factual aspects and noting that full details of the stock were furnished, found that the revenue...

  5. Validity of the assessment framed u/s 147 - Proof of service of notice - There was no valid service of notice u/s 148 of the Act in the present case. The finding of the...

  6. Credit of TDS - Non-reflection of TDS credit in its 26AS statement - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged the genuine hardship faced by the appellant - While recognizing...

  7. Modvat credit - manufacture of coils - The question whether winding an old motor would amount to manufacture of a new coil was not addressed properly - matter remanded back - AT

  8. Extension of time for filing refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - question needs to be factually addressed only by the adjudicating authority - AT

  9. SEEPZ unit - Violation of DTA sale entitlement - Adjudicating authority has computed the duty demand wrongly - Since the Revenue has not come in appeal against the said...

  10. Revocation of CHA License - appellant failed to verify the address at which the two clients operated and that requirement of ‘know your customer (KYC)’ was entirely...

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates