SC Explains When Shares Received After Company Amalgamation are Taxable as Business Income || SC: Excavators, Dumpers Etc Used Within Factories aren’t Motor Vehicles For Road Tax Purposes || SC: Complaints Alleging Fraud under Companies Act Can Be Filed Only By SFIO, Not By Private Parties || SC: Preventive Detention Cannot Override Bail and Requires Proof of a Threat to Public Order || Supreme Court: Multiple Complaints Are Valid For Dishonour of Several Cheques in One Transaction || SC: Bail Should Not be Refused Mechanically Nor Granted Based on Irrelevant Considerations || Gujarat HC: Motor Accident Compensation Doesn’t Cover Medical Expenses Paid by Charity || HP High Court: Panchayati Raj Elections Cannot Be Postponed Beyond Five-Year Term || Ker HC: Victim Cannot File Second Appeal Seeking Special Leave Against Acquittal Under S.419(4) BNSS || Delhi HC: Right to Higher or Professional Education is Fundamental and Cannot be Curtailed Lightly

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 :