SC: Externally Procured Parts Given For Assembly, Not Used in Manufacture, Not Liable to Excise Duty || SC: Upholding Surendra Koli’s Conviction on Rejected Evidence Would Violate Articles 14 and 21 || SC: In Execution Petition, Decree-Holder Must Prove Violation by Judgment Debtor || SC: Insurers Must Compensate Accident Victims Despite Policy Breach, Can Recover From Owner || Kerala HC: Long-Term Posting of Same Police Officer at Sabarimala May Affect Transparency, Efficiency || Delhi HC: Post-Dated Cheques Given as Security Attract Section 138 NI Act After Liability Arises || MP High Court: Railways Liable for Deaths on Tracks if it Fails to Take Preventive Measures || Ker HC: NDPS Case Stands Even if Contraband Listed in Ml, if Chemical Report Shows Equivalent Weight || Kerala HC: Father’s Retirement Benefits Can Be Attached for Child Maintenance Despite S.60(1)(g) CPC || Supreme Court: A Decree Declared 'Nullity' Can be Challenged at Any Stage, Including Execution

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 :