Failure to declare amount in return alone does not imply wilful suppression
Last updated: 15 September 2023
Court :
CESTAT, Chandigarh
Brief :
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.
Citation :
Excise Appeal No. 57958 of 2013 dated August 25, 2023
You have reached daily limit of 2 Free Judgements. To view this or other Judgements please subscribe to CCI PRO :
Stay updated! Stay ads free
Browse CAclubindia ads free.
Latest updates on WA.
Daily E-Newsletter and much more.
CCI PRO annual subscription :
Original Price : INR 2999/-
Offer Price : INR 1999/-
Duration : 1 year
(Prices Inclusive of GST)
Know More
Note: If you are a PRO member already, please click here to login (for ad free experience)
Bimal Jain
Published in Excise
Views : 239
Comments
Trending Online Classes
-
LIVE Course on GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C (Technical | Practical | Concept - Based)
Sachin Jain03 November 2025
CAclubindia
