The adhoc exemption order did not restrict the use of ...

Exemption Order Clarified: Tribunal Overturns Decision on Stadium Infrastructure, Dismisses Time-Barred Violation Notice.

August 21, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

The adhoc exemption order did not restrict the use of floodlights solely for World Cup matches; it aimed to uplift the stadium's infrastructure standards. The department erroneously assumed that World Cup matches were non-commercial, while one-day internationals were commercial. The exemption order made no such distinction. The show cause notice lacked factual or legal basis for alleging a violation of condition (ii). Regarding time limitation, the notice did not allege suppression of facts or intention to evade customs duty. The department issued the notice after collecting documents from the appellant, indicating no suppression. With a lapse of over 7 years, the demand was time-barred as the proviso to Section 28(1) was not applicable. The Appellate Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The adhoc exemption order did not restrict the use of ...

Exemption Order Clarified: Tribunal Overturns Decision on Stadium Infrastructure, Dismisses Time-Barred Violation Notice.

August 21, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

You may also like:

The CESTAT ALLAHABAD ruled on the classification of Colour Television Sets in SKD condition, holding that incomplete parts cannot be classified as CTVs. The decision was...

Rectification application u/s 254 - Tribunal not followed the decision on the identical facts by the Coordinate Bench which is confirmed by this Court - The Court...

Refund of countervailing duty - exit from the status of 100% EOU under the STPI Scheme - denial on the ground that the duty paid on de-bonded goods are IT infrastructure...

The case pertains to the rectification of a mistake and reopening of assessment u/s 147 versus assessment u/s 153C. The information or seized document belonging to the...

It is true that the decision of the Tribunal is somewhat brief and it would have been desirable if the Tribunal had given more elaborate facts - however, that by itself...

Power of Tribunal when it disagree with earlier decision of Tribunal - there are only two methods to disagree is either the decision is per in-curium or the decision is...

Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor under Section 33 of the IBC - The appellant contended that the RP misled the CoC regarding the possession and valuation of assets,...

Application u/s 7 dismissed without arguments addressed. Tribunal failed to adhere to the principle of hearing both parties before condemning. Order set aside, matter...

Rejection of Section 7 application - The appellate tribunal overturned the adjudicating authority's decision to dismiss the Section 7 application due to non-compliance...

Approval u/s 80G(5) - eligibility - The tribunal had considered whether the law required significant charitable activities to be carried out to be eligible for...

Accrual of income in India - taxability of the “software” supplied to Indian affiliates - The Tribunal's decision effectively overturns the AO's and DRP's stance,...

Rectification u/s 154 - The Assessee filed a rectification application, which was dismissed by the CIT(A) based on the assumption of Tribunal's adjudication on the issue....

CESTAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed the issue of valuation of imported Slack Wax/Residue Wax. The Tribunal found no evidence to dispute the transaction value...

Approval of a resolution plan - The Tribunal dismissed objections raised by dissenting homebuyers, citing that since the homebuyers as a class assented to the plans,...

Power of Tribunal u/s 254 to dismiss the appeal in limine - non prosecution - the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal only on the ground of non prosecution without...

Quick Updates: