SC: Public Premises Act Prevails over State Rent Laws For Evicting Unauthorised Occupants || SC: Doctors Were Unwavering Heroes in COVID-19, and Their Sacrifice Remains Indelible || SC Sets Up Secondary Medical Board to Assess Passive Euthanasia Plea of Man in Vegetative State || NCLAT: Amounts Listed As ‘Other Advances’ in Company’s Balance Sheet aren’t Financial Debt under IBC || NCLT Ahmedabad: Objections to Coc Cannot Bar RP From Challenging Preferential Transactions || J&K&L HC: Courts Should Exercise Caution When Granting Interim Relief in Public Infrastructure Cases || Bombay HC: SARFAESI Sale Invalid if Sale Certificate is Not Issued Prior to IBC Moratorium || Supreme Court: Police May Freeze Bank Accounts under S.102 CrPC in Prevention of Corruption Cases || SC: Arbitrator’s Mandate Ends on Time Expiry; Substituted Arbitrator Must Continue After Extension || SC: Woman May Move Her Department’s ICC For Harassment by Employee of Another Workplace

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 :