SC: Completed Trial can't be Remanded for Procedural Lapse Unless Prejudice is Proven || SC: Sessions Courts Cannot Bar Statutory Remission and Commutation Through Special Sentences || SC: Article 311 Bar Inapplicable If Removing Officer Equals Appointing Authority in Status || SC: Contractual Bar Prevents Arbitral Tribunal From Awarding Pre-Reference Interest || SC Frames Guidelines to Prevent POCSO Act Misuse by Parents in Custody Disputes || Delhi HC Directs DLSA to Convey Trial Court’s Encouraging Message and Compensation to POCSO Survivor || Delhi HC: Gravity of UAPA Offence Cannot Justify Prolonged PMLA Detention || Delhi HC Affirms Equestrian Federation's Youth Olympics Selection, Calls for Clearer Norms & Timeline || Delhi HC: Ajeet Bharti Used Caste Superiority to Humiliate Chandrashekhar Azad || Supreme Court: Anti-Suit Injunction Cannot Rest on Speculation of Unenforceable Foreign Decree

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 :