Clandestine manufacture and removal - difference in quantity of ...

Discrepancies in ER-1 Returns and Balance Sheet: Case Remanded for Further Review on Job Work Manufacturing Duty Exemption.

July 3, 2019

Case Laws Central Excise AT

Clandestine manufacture and removal - difference in quantity of goods as shown cleared in ER-1 returns and the balance sheet - this difference is only because the appellant manufactured the goods on job work basis for which they are not liable to duty - Since details are not reflected from the records and also order-in-original was passed before the additional reply - matter remanded

View Source

← Previous Next →

Clandestine manufacture and removal - difference in quantity of ...

Discrepancies in ER-1 Returns and Balance Sheet: Case Remanded for Further Review on Job Work Manufacturing Duty Exemption.

July 3, 2019

Case Laws Central Excise AT

You may also like:

Central Excise Return New Form ER 1 for monthly return and ER 3 for quarterly return w.e.f 1.10.2011

Validity of assessment order - Discrepancy Nos. 1, 2, 10, and 11: The discrepancies include issues such as non-GST supplies, alleged mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1...

Demand based on reconciliation of ST returns with the balance sheet - stay granted - AT

Clandestine Removal - Demand based on Balance Sheet / Profit and loss account figures - There must be some positive evidence brought on record to substantiate the...

Demand - duty on difference between finished goods reported in their 3CD returns and the RG-1 daily stock account - less quantity of clearance has been shown in their...

The High Court addressed the issue of determining the value of supply in a job work scenario, challenging an order u/s 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner...

Duty demand - discrepancy in relation to recording of e-Challans in the ER-1 return - Considering the proof of payment of e-receipts, which is on record and the same can...

Section 80P deduction claim filed in a return submitted in response to notice u/s 142(1) is valid. The Income Tax Act does not mandate that the return must be filed u/ss...

The assessee company had shown the liability as outstanding amounts payable to three disputed creditors in its balance sheet as of 31.03.2015. The assessee provided...

Levy of Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - The ITAT ruled that since there was no variation between the returned and assessed income, there was no concealment of income by the...

Levy of penalty under Rule 12 (6) of Central Excise Rules - late filing of Returns (ER-1) for the period July, 2017 to February, 2018 - There is no saving Clause in the...

Entitlement for refund of input credit in cash, which was neither transitioned in accordance with TRAN-1 (GST) procedure into the new regime nor got reflected in the...

Valuation - Job-work - The valuation of job worked goods computed by the department on the basis of cost of raw material + job work charges is incorrect.

HC held that adjudicating authority must consider GSTR-9 annual returns when evaluating Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims, rather than solely relying on discrepancies...

Demand of Service tax - discrepancy in the figures in the balance sheet and service returns - there was no suppression of fact on the part of the respondent - AT

Quick Updates: