Clandestine removal - surplus stock of angles, channel and joist ...

Court Rejects Appellant's Defense on Surplus Stock Removal; No Substantial Legal Question Under Central Excise Rules.

December 3, 2018

Case Laws Central Excise HC

Clandestine removal - surplus stock of angles, channel and joist - non-acceptance of appellant's explanation does not raise any substantial question of law

View Source

← Previous Next →

Clandestine removal - surplus stock of angles, channel and joist ...

Court Rejects Appellant's Defense on Surplus Stock Removal; No Substantial Legal Question Under Central Excise Rules.

December 3, 2018

Case Laws Central Excise HC

You may also like:

Jurisdiction of civil court u/s 34 of SARFAESI Act was in question. Suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction was rejected by lower courts under Order...

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the assessing officer against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, holding that no substantial question of law...

The Tribunal set aside the disallowance of short-term loss claimed by the assessee in the Profit and Loss Account, holding that the shares were acquired under a normal...

Addition u/s 68 - substantial question of law - The Supreme court has held that, the jurisdiction of the High Court to interfere with the orders passed by the Courts...

Validity of the decision High Court deciding the appeal on admission state itself on merit - The Supreme Court observed that while the High Court had framed certain...

The Supreme Court held that the High Court should formulate the second substantial question of law proposed by the Revenue regarding whether violation of conditions u/s...

Substantial question of law to be made out u/s 260A or not? - Undisclosed income surrendered during the Search and Seizure action - to be taxed at normal rate or tax...

The High Court considered the issue of whether Sweet Whey powder can be cleared duty-free as a "Leavening Agent" under a duty-free import authorization license. The...

The Calcutta High Court considered a case involving the clandestine removal of wire rods and the levy of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The...

The case pertains to additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of bogus share application money and commission for bogus accommodation entries. The ITAT deleted...

TPA - comparable selection - substantial question of law - the Revenue has routinely brought such matters before this Court knowing fully well that the Transfer Pricing...

Seizure of goods as smuggled into the country from Myanmar u/s 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The burden of proof lies on the respondent u/s 123 to show that the seized...

The High Court addressed the issue of whether the Tribunal could uphold the refund granted by the Commissioner, despite setting aside the cost recovery charges demand....

Substantial question of law to be made u/s 260A - prerequisite of admission of the appeal before the High court - The ITAT hold that the assessee had correctly offered...

Validity of Judgement of High Court - While admitting the appeal of the Revenue, the High Court has framed 10 question of laws - However, while disposing the appeal, the...

Quick Updates: