The CESTAT, Chandigarh in M/s. M R Beltings v. Commissioner of Central Excise Rohtak [Excise Appeal No. 57958 of 2013 dated August 25, 2023] set aside the demand order on the ground that the entire demand is barred by limitation since, the department was not able to bring anything on record to show that the assessee has suppressed the material fact in order to evade the payment of duty.
- Facts
- Issue
- Held
Source: www.a2ztaxcorp.com
Latest Posts in "India"
- Supreme Court to Decide if Industrial Felt is ‘Fabric’ or ‘Machinery Part’ for VAT Purposes
- Supreme Court Rules: “Parts” Must Functionally Integrate into Machinery, Rejecting End-Use Claims
- Centre to Consider Panel’s GST Recommendations on Air Purifiers, Tells Delhi High Court
- Sunglasses Not Classified as Spectacles, Taxable at Higher 12.5% VAT: Punjab & Haryana HC
- BMW Urges No GST Hike on EVs as Electric Car Sales Surge Over 200% in 2025













