Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy || NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required || NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes || Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction || Delhi High Court: Software Receipts Not Taxable on PE Basis Already Rejected by ITAT || Delhi High Court: Statutory Appeals Cannot Be Denied Due to DRAT Vacancies or Administrative Delays || J&K&L HC: Failure to Frame Limitation Issue Not Fatal; Courts May Examine Limitation Suo Motu || Bombay HC: Preventing Feeding Stray Dogs at Society or Bus Stop is Not 'Wrongful Restraint' || Gujarat HC: Not All Injuries Reduce Earning Capacity; Functional Disability Must Be Assessed || Delhi HC: Framing of Charges is Interlocutory and Not Appealable under Section 21 of NIA Act

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 :