Supreme Court: Banks Cannot Invoke IBC Against Debtors For Builder-Linked Loans || Supreme Court: Non-Disclosure of Failed Candidates’ Marks Does Not Imply They Passed Exams || Supreme Court: Murder Accused Cannot Inherit Property of the Person Allegedly Killed || Supreme Court: Delay in Deposit Does Not Automatically Cancel Contracts under Specific Relief Act || SC: Railways is Treated as a Consumer under the Electricity Act, Not a Distribution Licensee || Bom HC: Genuine Residents Cannot be Denied Relief Due to Aadhaar Deactivation or Biometric Mismatch || Punjab & Haryana High Court: Raid on Rajinder Gupta’s Factory Soon After He Joined BJP From AAP || Madhya Pradesh HC: Delay Can Be Condoned under Limitation Act Where Statute Has No Express Bar || Cal HC Upholds PILs on Great Nicobar Project, Noting Alleged FRA Violations and Tribal Vulnerability || Calcutta HC: Vodafone Idea Must Obtain Copyright Society Licence to Use Songs as Caller Tunes

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 :