Kerala HC Upholds Life Terms For Five, Acquits Two in Renjith Johnson Murder, Says TIP Not Needed || Kerala HC Orders Emergency Electric Fencing at Tribal School to Address Rising Wildlife Conflict || Madras HC: Arbitrator Can’t Pierce Corporate Veil to Bind Non-Signatory and Partly Sets Aside Award || Calcutta HC: Post-Award Claim For Municipal Tax Reimbursement is Not Maintainable under Section 9 || Tripura HC: Tax Authorities Cannot Revive Repealed VAT Powers or Retain Deposits Without Law || J&K&L HC: Obtaining a Passport is a Constitutional Right; Citizens Need Not Prove Travel Necessity || Allahabad HC: Police Report in Non-Cognizable Offence is a Complaint; Accused Must Be Heard First || Kerala HC: Hospitals Must Display Rates and Cannot Deny Emergency Care For Lack of Advance Payment || Orissa HC: Convict’s Refusal to Appeal Through Legal Aid Must be Recorded in Writing || SC Halts Deer Translocation From Delhi’s AN Jha Park And Orders a Probe into DDA Negligence

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 :