SC: Recoveries U/S 27 of Evidence Act Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction; 1988 Murder Acquittal Restored || SC: Successive Impleadment Applications are Barred by Res Judicata under Different CPC Provisions || Supreme Court Halts Coercive Measures in CJP Protest Cases, Directs Release of Minors || Supreme Court: National Commission for Scheduled Castes Lacks Power to Pass Binding Orders || Bombay HC: Alleged Illegal Arrest Alone Cannot Trigger Contempt Action Against Police || Bombay HC Quashes Order against Taiwan National, Says Online Study Didn't Breach Visa Rules || P&H High Court Issues Directions on LADC Scheme After Reviewing Lawyers' Objections || Allahabad HC: Suspension of Sentence Plea Need Not Take Priority if Appeal is Ready || Allahabad High Court: Surcharge Recovery From Pradhan Must Follow Panchayat Raj Act Procedure || Allahabad HC Directs IB Probe into 4 Lucknow Lawyers, Raises Concern over Lawyer-Police Nexus

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 :