Supreme Court: Vacancies From Resignations under CUSAT Act Must Follow Communal Rotation || Supreme Court: Forest Land Cannot Be Leased or Used For Agriculture Without Centre’s Approval || Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence and Accused’s Role Must Guide Suspension of Sentence under CrPC || Supreme Court: Arbitral Awards Cannot be Set Aside For Mere Legal Errors or Misreading of Evidence || SC Acknowledges Child Trafficking as a Grave Reality and Issues Guidelines to Assess Victim Evidence || Allahabad HC: When Parties Extend an Agreement by Conduct, The Arbitration Clause Extends Too || Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal || Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination || Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act || Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal

Jayaswal Neco Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur - (Supreme Court) (06 Aug 2015)

Rule 173G payment from CENVAT Account

MANU/SC/0839/2015

Excise

The Supreme Court held in favour of an Assessee claiming payment from its CENVAT Account could be counted towards demand under Rule 173G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Court, affirming the position taken in a previous High Court judgment, added that since then the Central Excise Rules, 2002 themselves had been amended discontinuing this provision for payment. The Assessee's dispute had originated prior to the amendment.

Relevant : Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune v. Dai Ichi Karkaria Limited MANU/SC/0467/1999 Eicher Motors Ltd. v. Union of India MANU/SC/0051/1999

Tags : EXCISE CENVAT DUTY PAYMENT

Share :