Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report || Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act || SC Holds Landowners Who Accept Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Seek Statutory Benefits || Supreme Court: Endless Investigations and Long Delays in Chargesheets Can Justify Quashing || Delhi HC: Arbitrator Controls Evidence and Appellate Courts Cannot Reassess Facts || Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint || Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint || Delhi HC: Economic Offender Cannot Seek Travel Abroad For Medical Treatment When Available In India || SC: Governors and President Have No Fixed Timeline To Assent To Bills; “Deemed Assent” is Invalid || SC: Assigning a Decree For Specific Performance of a Sale Agreement Does Not Require Registration

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 :