Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesTribunal Order Can’t Be Treated as ‘Additional Evidence’; 18% IGST Upheld on...

Tribunal Order Can’t Be Treated as ‘Additional Evidence’; 18% IGST Upheld on Medical Monitors: CESTAT 

Indirect Taxes

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
Tribunal Order Can’t Be Treated as ‘Additional Evidence’; 18% IGST Upheld on Medical Monitors: CESTAT

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Mumbai Bench of Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that a Tribunal judgment cannot be treated as “additional evidence” for the purpose of remanding a matter. The Bench comprising Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati (Member–Judicial) and M.M. Parthiban (Member–Technical) allowed the appeals filed by the assessee and ruled that Integrated Goods…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GST

GST Demand Based On Return Scrutiny Requires Prior ASMT-10 Notice: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has set aside a GST demand proceeding involving alleged under-declaration...
GST

Govt. Funding Doesn’t Establish Eligibility For 12% GST On Spinning Mill Construction: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Pune Bench, has upheld 18% GST...
GST

Voluntary ITC Reversal Doesn’t Erase Interest Liability After Utilisation: GSTAT 

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Lucknow, has upheld an interest demand...
Indirect Taxes

Bombay High Court Quashes Customs Order After Challenge Over Alleged AI-Generated Supreme Court Judgments

The Bombay High Court has set aside a customs adjudication order after a logistics...

More like this

GST

GST Demand Based On Return Scrutiny Requires Prior ASMT-10 Notice: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has set aside a GST demand proceeding involving alleged under-declaration...
GST

Govt. Funding Doesn’t Establish Eligibility For 12% GST On Spinning Mill Construction: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Pune Bench, has upheld 18% GST...
GST

Voluntary ITC Reversal Doesn’t Erase Interest Liability After Utilisation: GSTAT 

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Lucknow, has upheld an interest demand...