Del. HC: Denying Seat to Candidate Due to Administrative Fault Would be Unjust || All. HC: Not Mandatory for Passport Authority to Impound Passport of Accused Persons || Raj. HC: In Absence of Statutory Rules, Denying Appt. on Basis of Minimum Height is Discriminatory || MP HC: Party Required to Lay Factual Foundation for Getting Benefit of Section 65 of Evidence Act || Ker. HC: Settlement of Cases Including Offence of Rape & POCSO Act Offences is Not Permissible || Gujarat High Court: Wife Allowed to Become Guardian & Manager of Husband in Coma || SC: Partition of Property Can’t be Done by Metes & Bounds in Chandigarh || SC Approves Requirement for Judicial Officers to be Converse With Local Language || Kerala High Court: Denial of Ordinary Leave Reduces Convict’s Chances of Rehabilitation || Delhi HC Issues Circular Regarding Pass-Overs or Adjournments in Bail, Parole Matters

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 :